Active Citizenship and Young People: Opportunities, Experiences ...

RESEARCHActive Citizenship and Young People:Opportunities, Experiences and ChallengesIn and Beyond SchoolCitizenship Education Longitudinal Study:Fourth Annual ReportEleanor Ireland, David Kerr, Joana Lopesand Julie Nelsonwith Elizabeth CleaverNational Foundation for Educational ResearchResearch Report RR732

Research ReportNo 732Active Citizenship and Young People:Opportunities, Experiences and ChallengesIn and Beyond SchoolCitizenship Education Longitudinal Study:Fourth Annual ReportEleanor Ireland, David Kerr, Joana Lopesand Julie Nelsonwith Elizabeth CleaverNational Foundation for Educational ResearchThe views expressed in this report are the authors’ and do not necessarily reflect those of the Departmentfor Education and Skills.© National Foundation for Educational Research 2006ISBN 1 84478 714 1

ContentspageAcknowledgementsExecutive summaryiiii1. Introduction, context and report focus 11.1 Citizenship in schools 11.2 Aims of the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study 21.3 How is citizenship progressing in schools? 31.4 Focus of the report 51.5 Relevance of the report focus 71.6 Structure of the report 112. Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an update 132.1 Overall approach to citizenship education 142.2 Citizenship in the curriculum 172.3 School leader and teacher confidence about citizenship 192.4 Learning about citizenship 212.5 Teaching and learning approaches and resources 232.6 Assessment 242.7 Staff training opportunities 252.8 Impact and challenges of citizenship education 263. Knowledge and understanding 293.1 Understanding of rights, responsibilities and decision making in school 303.2 Understanding of rights, responsibilities and decision making beyondschool 343.3 The contribution of citizenship education to knowledge andunderstanding 354. Active participation and skills of participation 394.1 Opportunities at classroom level 404.2 Participation in the school community 424.3 The wider community 474.4 Factors affecting opportunities for active participation 495. Community and belonging 555.1 Factors contributing to a sense of belonging in the school community 565.2 In what circumstances does a sense of belonging to the widercommunity develop? 625.3 Why is community important to young people? 696. Moving active citizenship forward 716.1 What is the potential for citizenship education, as an active practice (a) totake place and (b) to contribute to the Change for Children programmeaction plan? 726.2 How far is the potential for citizenship education, as an active practice, (a)to take place and (b) to contribute to the Change for Children programmeaction plan recognised and realised in practice? 73

6.3 What are the key challenges and ways forward for active citizenship inthe present and future? 766.4 Moving forward – a final comment 85Appendix 1. Methodology and sample information 89Appendix 2. References 95Appendix 3. The Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study 999

AcknowledgementsThe authors would like to express their thanks to the Department forEducation and Skills (DfES) for providing sponsorship for this research andespecially to Michele Weatherburn and Sarah Taylor at the DfES for theirsupport throughout the Study. We would also like to thank the members of theStudy’s Steering Group for their helpful comments on the drafts of this report.The authors also gratefully acknowledge the support provided by colleagues atthe National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) in the completionof this research, especially Barbara Lyddiatt and Catherine Cox and their teamin Research Data Services, for organising the collection of large quantities ofdata, and Tom Benton, our project statistician from the Foundation’s StatisticsResearch and Analysis Group, for his expert handling of the statisticalanalyses and help with the interpretation of the data. Further thanks are due toSheila Stoney, for her assistance with the Study. We are also grateful for thework done by NFER librarians in drawing our attention to the most recentliterature concerning citizenship and citizenship education. We would like togive particular thanks to Sue Stoddart, for her ever efficient administrativeassistance and support.Finally, we are deeply grateful to all the schools, teachers and students whoparticipated in the surveys and case studies, and particularly to the citizenshipcoordinators in case-study schools who put much time and effort intoorganising our visits to their schools. Without their help, this report and theimportant insights that it contains would not have been possible.i

Executive summaryExecutive summaryIntroductionThe Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, conducted by the NationalFoundation for Educational Research (NFER) on behalf of the Department forEducation and Skills (DfES), aims to identify, measure and evaluate the extentto which effective practice in citizenship education develops in schools 1 . Thestudy began in 2001 and will conclude in 2009 2 . The report sets out thefindings from the second longitudinal survey and visits to ten case-studyschools.Key findingsApproaches to citizenship education in schools: an updateThe analysis provides an important update with regard to the status andpractice of citizenship education in schools. The findings from this update arelisted in brief below:• Analysis suggests that the main change in approach to citizenshipeducation in schools has been an increased focus on curriculum aspects ofcitizenship education provision. The proportion of schools described asprogressing and implicit, in the typology of schools developed in 2003,remained largely unchanged in 2005. However, the proportion of schoolsdescribed as minimalist decreased, while the proportion described asfocused increased.• Schools continued to use a variety of citizenship delivery models.However, there was a notable increase in the use of dedicated timeslotsand in the use of assembly time.• Teachers were more likely in 2005, than in 2003, to believe thatcitizenship education was best approached as a specific subject andthrough extra-curricular activities.• School leaders and teachers were more familiar with a range of keydocuments related to citizenship education in 2005 than in 2003.1For further information about the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study and details of previousannual reports visit www.nfer.ac.uk/research-areas/citizenship2The second longitudinal survey involved a nationally representative sample of 91 schools, andreports the responses of 81 school leaders, 301 teachers and 13,643 students in Year 9 (age 14 to15). The case-study school visits involved in-depth interviews with Key Stage 3 and 4 students,teachers and senior managers. The data was collected in the academic year 2004-2005.iii

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report• Teacher confidence in teaching citizenship-related topics saw a moderateincrease in 2005, although overall confidence levels remained relativelylow.• Students were more aware of citizenship in 2005 than in 2003. The mainways in which they reported learning about citizenship was: throughpersonal, social and health education (PSHE), religious education, as adiscrete subject and tutor groups.• Descriptions of citizenship education that encompassed ‘active’components, such as voting and politics, were relatively uncommonamongst students, although a sizeable proportion identified the importanceof belonging to the community.• Although traditional teaching and learning methods continued to dominatein citizenship and other subjects, a range of more active methods were alsoused. There was also an increase in the use of computers, the internet andexternal agencies, and a decrease in the use of textbooks.• There was a substantial increase in the proportion of schools with anassessment policy for citizenship education in 2005, and the use of formalassessment methods was considerably more widespread than in 2003.• Teachers received more training in citizenship in 2005 than in 2003.Despite this there was a high demand for further training in relation tosubject matter, assessment and reporting and teaching methods.[I1]• The main challenges to citizenship education were felt, by school leadersand teachers, to include time pressure, assessment, the status of citizenshipand teachers’ subject expertise with student engagement and participationseen as lesser challenges.BackgroundThe report has a specific focus on active citizenship and young people. This isin direct response to a growing recognition of the link between citizenshipeducation in schools and wider policy initiatives which attempt to increase theparticipation and engagement of children and young people in society. Thereport uses the latest data from the Study in three ways: firstly, to update theprogress of the development of citizenship education, as an active practice, inschools generally from 2003 to 2005; secondly, to probe the nature and extentof the opportunities and experiences that students have had in relation tocitizenship as an active practice in their schools, and in wider communities(i.e. in contexts beyond school) and the challenges involved in providing suchopportunities and experiences; and, thirdly, to explore the readiness ofcitizenship education practice in schools to contribute to wider policyinitiatives, notably the make a positive contribution outcome in the EveryChild Matters: Change for Children programme and civil renewal action plan.The report’s discussion and conclusions focus on the key challenges to thepromotion of active citizenship in and beyond school.iv

Executive summaryPotential for citizenship education as an active practice to takeplace in and beyond schoolThe findings from the study highlight the considerable potential for citizenshipeducation, as an active practice, (a) to take place, especially in schools, withlinks to wider communities, and (b) to contribute to the Every Child Matters:Change for Children programme action plan. They suggest that a number ofthe key underlying factors, which foster and sustain active citizenship, werealready evident to, and supported by, students in their daily lives in andbeyond school.These factors include:• Sense of community and belonging – students valued the concept ofcommunity and welcome the sense of belonging that being part of acommunity can bring. They want to be part of strong, safe communitiesthat are based on networks and friendships that foster trust, concern forindividual well-being, a sense of self-worth and that encourage individualand collective social responsibility.• Attachment to the school community – the majority of students viewedschool as the main social and participative community in their lives. Thiswas because of the amount of time they spend there and the friendshipsthey make and networks they join. They saw school as providing a socialand participative experience as much as an educational one.• Attachment to wider communities – though wider communities,particularly the local community, were not the major community in whichyoung people participated, they still valued being part of this widercommunity. They cared about what happened in the wider community andvalued being part of family and neighbourhood networks, where thesewere present.• Having a voice – young people believed that they should have a voice onmatters that affect them, especially in school. Most students said thatwhilst it might not always be appropriate for them to have the final say,they valued being involved in decision making and wanted to be consultedabout issues that affect them. They were keen to show that they can usetheir voice, both individually and collectively, in a responsible manner.• Making a contribution – most young people were keen to make an activeand responsible contribution to the communities to which they belong,particularly the school community. Many students, particularly older ones,felt that they should take responsibility for themselves, their schools andtheir peers. They demonstrated considerable sophistication in their viewsof the need for a balance between the granting of rights and exercise ofresponsibilities. However, they also revealed a clearer awareness of theirrights than of their responsibilities.• Linking opportunities and experiences – young people made linksbetween their opportunities and experiences of active citizenship indifferent contexts. They were able to compare and contrast theirexperiences between, as well as within, schools, and between school andv

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reporttheir local community. They were sensitive to change in their opportunitiesand experiences of active citizenship, in these different contexts.These factors are reinforced through educational policy and legal statute,notably:• Statutory citizenship education in schools – schools have a legal duty toensure that all students receive their statutory entitlement to citizenshipeducation. The aims and processes of the new subject, as detailed in thecurriculum Order, afford considerable potential for the development ofcitizenship as an active practice. Most students have the capacity to andshow an interest in taking part and making a contribution throughcitizenship education, as an active practice, in their schools.• New statutory frameworks for the inspection of schools and ofchildren’s services – these new frameworks encourage schools and thosein charge of children’s services at a local level to ensure that children andyoung people have a voice, feel safe, secure and valued and are involvedin making a positive contribution, in partnership with others. They alsoactively involve children and young people in the actual review andinspection process in schools and local communities. The frameworkssupport the change for children programme action plan.Recognition and realisation of potential for active citizenship inpracticeDespite the existence of supportive student attitudes and legislativeframeworks the evidence from the survey data and case-study schools suggeststhat the potential for citizenship education, as an active practice, to take placeis only partially being realised at present. This, in turn, limits the potential ofcitizenship education to contribute to the new Every Child Matters: Changefor Children programme.The evidence in the report confirms that although students currently haveopportunities and experiences of active citizenship, in general, these:• were largely confined to the school context;• comprised largely ‘horizontal’ rather than ‘vertical’ participation andengagement 3 . They concerned opportunities to take part rather thanopportunities to effect real change by engaging with the decision-makingprocess;• did not often connect opportunities and experiences in the curriculum withthose in the whole school;3Jochum et al., 2005 draw a distinction between ‘horizontal’ and ‘vertical’ participation.‘Horizontal’ participation relates to participation in community activities, charities, sports clubs,associations and is less formal. ‘Vertical’ participation, meanwhile, relates to participation inpolitical affairs, including participation in political processes and governance related to thedecision-making processes in institutions and in society.vi

Executive summary• often only involved certain groups of students rather than all students,despite an invitation for all students to participate;• did not regularly link to wider contexts and communities beyond school.The case-study school experiences also highlighted the variation in thecontribution of citizenship, as a national curriculum subject, to students’sopportunities and experiences of active citizenship. While there was evidenceof considerable efforts underway in some schools to make the contributionreal and meaningful for students, this was not the case in all schools.Recommendations concerning active citizenship for audiencesinvolved in citizenship educationThe findings suggest a number of recommendations that the main audiencescurrently involved in citizenship education at a range of levels should considerin order to take active citizenship forward. Some of the recommendations forpolicy makers at national and local level, practitioners in schools andrepresentatives of the wider community are listed below. There is a particularfocus on four key measures that help to lay secure foundations for activecitizenship in schools:Recommendations for policy makers at national and local level• Increase awareness and understanding about citizenship as an activepractice and of the key contribution that schools can make in laying thefoundations for such practice.• Publicise and make more explicit the links between the promotion ofactive citizenship in schools and the wider participation and civil renewalagendas, notably Every Child Matters: Change for Children programmeaction plan, and emphasise the particular contribution of the citizenshipcurriculum to participation.• Work to provide a more coordinated approach to the development ofcitizenship as an active practice, particularly at a local level, that linksschools with key community partners and organisations, and affords more‘joined up’ opportunities and experiences for young people.• Ensure that young people have opportunities and experiences of activecitizenship in the community that offer experiences of both ‘horizontal’and ‘vertical’ participation and enable real engagement with decisionmakingprocesses.• Provide requisite training and resources, particularly in schools forschool leaders, citizenship coordinators and teachers, as well as forstudents. This training should focus on improving the understanding ofcitizenship as an active practice, and increase the confidence of its deliverythrough more active learning and teaching approaches.• Work in multi-agency partnerships, involving schools, to tackle thechallenge of encouraging increased engagement and participation fromthose students who are underachieving, disaffected or socially excluded.vii

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportRecommendations for school leaders, coordinators and teachersThe cumulative practice from the case-study schools identifies four measuresthat were important in enhancing the active citizenship opportunities andexperiences for students in those schools. These four measures suggest that inorder to improve the chances of laying secure foundations for citizenship as anactive practice within the curriculum, with links to the whole school and widercommunity beyond, schools should consider ensuring that they:1. Build and maintain a strong sense of belonging to the schoolcommunity (with links to belonging to the local community).There are a number of measures that schools can take to develop a sense ofbelonging for students within the school community including:• Giving students a voice.• Creating a climate for mutual respect between teachers and students.• Ensuring that there is equality of opportunity for all students.• Dividing the school community up into smaller communities.• Improving the quality of the school buildings and facilities that studentsuse.2. Develop an ongoing, active focus in the delivery of citizenshipeducationThis includes:• ‘Bringing to life’ citizenship-related lessons for students.• Providing an equal focus on rights and responsibilities.• Encouraging students to be critically active and reflective.• Ensuring citizenship-related lessons and topics are sufficientlydifferentiated.• Considering the skills and knowledge development needs of students andteachers.3. Assist students to participate in decision-making processes inschool and beyond, on a regular basisSchools need to do more to help students to:• Understand why having a voice is important.• Use their voice effectively.• Understand the mechanisms and processes of influencing policy andchange.viii

Executive summary• Believe that their voice will be heard, taken seriously and acted upon.4. Provide sufficient training and development in relation to activecitizenship for teachers and students.At present, many citizenship coordinators and teachers regard activecitizenship as something distinct from the citizenship curriculum, and arestruggling with a sense of what it means and how it should be approached.Training is needed to help develop a view of active citizenship as an integralfeature of learning and teaching in citizenship education. Training of teachersshould take place in parallel with that of students.Recommendations for representatives of the wider community• Recognise that the provision of opportunities and experiences of activecitizenship is not solely the responsibility of schools. Schools can make amajor contribution but they cannot develop citizenship as an activepractice effectively without the support of those in the wider community.• Take responsibility for their actions and the impact that these have onyoung people. Students in the case-study schools were influenced by theattitudes and behaviour of those in their families, neighbourhoods andthose they saw in the media. Work hard to promote a strong sense ofbelonging, particularly to the local neighbourhood or community, andactively involve young people in that process.• Recognise that for many students the school is their main social andparticipative community and learn from best practice in how schools fostera sense of belonging to the school community. Those in the widercommunity can benefit from working with and in schools and sharing andpromoting good practice.• Encourage students to build on the knowledge, understanding and skillsthat they develop through active citizenship in schools by providing themwith further opportunities for active involvement and participation incommunities beyond school, that show them that their contribution isimportant and valued.Moving forwardThe findings from the fourth annual report underline the potency of the Studyin helping to identify, measure and evaluate the extent to which effectivepractice in citizenship education is developing in schools. Though these areinterim findings they help to shed more light on the progress of citizenshipeducation in schools and, in particular, on how well practitioners are definingand approaching citizenship as an active practice. They suggestrecommendations for key audiences involved in citizenship education. Theyalso prepare the ground for further analysis of active citizenship in futuresurveys and school case-study visits through the Citizenship EducationLongitudinal Study.ix

Introduction, context and report focus1. Introduction, context and report focus1.1 Citizenship in schoolsThe advent of citizenship as part of the statutory curriculum in schools inEngland is a recent phenomenon. It has its roots in the report of thegovernment appointed Advisory Group on Education for Citizenship and theTeaching of Democracy in Schools, which was set up in 1997 and chaired byProfessor (now Sir) Bernard Crick (Qualifications and Curriculum Authority(QCA), 1998; Kerr, 1999a and b). The Citizenship Advisory Group defined‘effective education for citizenship’ as comprising three separate butinterrelated strands. These are to be developed progressively through a youngperson’s education and training experiences, from pre-school to adulthood(DfEE, 1998, pp. 11–13) namely:• social and moral responsibility: ‘...children learning from the verybeginning self-confidence and socially and morally responsible behaviourboth in and beyond the classroom, both towards those in authority andtowards each other’. This strand acts as an essential pre-condition for theother two strands;• community involvement: ‘...learning about and becoming helpfullyinvolved in the life and concerns of their communities, including learningthrough community involvement and service to the community’. This, ofcourse, like the other two strands, is by no means limited to children’s timein school;• political literacy: ‘...pupils learning about, and how to make themselveseffective in, public life through knowledge, skills and values’. Here theterm ‘public life’ is used in its broadest sense to encompass realisticknowledge of, and preparation for, conflict resolution and decisionmaking, whether involving issues at local, national, European or globallevel.The Citizenship Advisory Group’s report was well received in a publicconsultation and, following the revision of the National Curriculum in 2000,citizenship education was incorporated for the first time in the schoolcurriculum between the ages 5 and 16 (QCA, 1999). Citizenship is currentlypart of a non-statutory framework for personal, social and health education(PSHE) and citizenship at Key Stages 1 and 2 (pupils age 5 to 11) and a newstatutory foundation subject at Key Stages 3 and 4 (students age 11 to 16).Schools have therefore been legally required to deliver citizenship educationfor all 11 to 16 year olds from September 2002.1

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportThe new citizenship Order at Key Stages 3 and 4 has programmes of study forcitizenship and an attainment target based on three interrelated elements:• knowledge and understanding about becoming informed citizens;• developing skills of enquiry and communication;• developing skills of participation and responsible action.The citizenship Order advises that:Teaching should ensure that knowledge and understanding aboutbecoming informed citizens are acquired and applied whendeveloping skills of enquiry and communication, and participationand responsible action. (QCA, 1999, pp. 14–15).The intended impact of citizenship in schools is encapsulated in a quotation inthe citizenship Order from Professor (Sir) Bernard Crick who states:Citizenship is more than a statutory subject. If taught well andtailored to local needs, its skills and values will enhance democraticlife for us all, both rights and responsibilities, beginning in school, andradiating out. (ibid, p.12)1.2 Aims of the Citizenship Education Longitudinal StudyThe Department for Education and Skills (DfES) has funded NFER to carryout the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study in order to strengthen theexisting evidence base for citizenship education and to obtain a clearer pictureof the progress of the introduction of citizenship education in schools post2002.The Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study (hereafter, the Study), whichbegan in 2001, is tracking a cohort of young people from age 11 to 18, whoentered secondary school in September 2002 and are the first students to havea statutory entitlement to citizenship education (Appendix 3 provides furtherdetails about the Study).The Study has one overarching and two subsidiary aims. The overarching aimis to:• Assess the short-term and long-term effects of citizenship education on theknowledge, skills and attitudes and behaviour of students.The two subsidiary aims are to:• Explore how different processes – in terms of school, teacher and studenteffects – can impact upon differential outcomes.2

Introduction, context and report focus• Set out, based on evidence collected by the Study and other sources, whatchanges could be made to the delivery of citizenship education in order toimprove the potential for effectiveness.The research design of the Study is based on four interrelated components:• A longitudinal survey of a cohort of Year 7 4 students tracking the wholeYear 7 group through Years 9 and 11 and 13 (or equivalent when theyare aged 18), their schools and their teachers;• Four cross-sectional surveys of Year 8, 10 and 12 students, their schoolsand their teachers;• Longitudinal school case studies;• A literature review.This is the Study’s fourth annual report. It draws upon a mixture ofquantitative and qualitative data from two components of the Study. Thequantitative data is drawn from the second sweep of the longitudinal survey(i.e. when the cohort of students was in Year 9) involving 13,643 students, 301teachers and 81 school leaders in 91 schools. It provides an update ofcitizenship education developments in schools. The qualitative data comesfrom in-depth interviews with Key Stage 3 and 4 students, teachers and seniormanagers in ten longitudinal case-study schools. It enables a more in-depthinvestigation of the reasons and factors that lie behind such developments.Reference is also made, for the purposes of comparison, to quantitative datafrom the first sweep of the longitudinal survey, carried out in 2003 when thelongitudinal cohort of students was in Year 7 (Kerr et al., 2003). More detailedinformation about the survey methodology, sample information, andcharacteristics of the case-study schools, is provided in Appendix 1.1.3 How is citizenship progressing in schools?The research and evidence base for citizenship education in schools, collegesand communities was weak prior to 2002 but is being strengthened all thetime. Many of the previous gaps in knowledge and understanding are rapidlybeing filled (Cleaver et al., 2005; Whiteley, 2005; Craig et al., 2004; Kerr andCleaver, 2004; Kerr et al., 2004). The Study has played a central role in this,alongside the inspection activities of the Office for Standards in Education(OFSTED) (2003; 2005b; 2005c; Bell, 2005a) and the monitoring undertakenby the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) (2003; 2004; 2005).4In terms of age of students and year groups the following classification applies in schools inEngland. Year 7 students age 11-12, Year 8 age 12-13, Year 9 age 13-14, Year 10 age 14-15, Year11 age 15-16, Year 12 age 16-17, Year 13 age 17-18.3

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportThe consensus from this evidence base includes:• Implementation gap – a recognition that there remains a gap between thevision of policy makers, as laid out by the Citizenship Advisory Group andin various curriculum frameworks for citizenship education, and the abilityof those in schools to understand, act upon and own that vision in practice.It will take time to close this gap;• Definition – a redefinition of citizenship education away from the threestrands in the Citizenship Advisory Group report to a growingconceptualisation of citizenship in schools as comprising three interrelatedaspects – the three citizenship ‘Cs’: citizenship learning in thecurriculum; opportunities and experiences of active citizenship in theschool culture; and opportunities and experiences of active citizenshipthrough links with the wider community. Practitioners find that thethree ‘Cs’ of citizenship fit well with the reality of daily practice inschools;• Approaches – acceptance that though provision is uneven, patchy andevolving, types of school and college approach to citizenship educationappear to be emerging. Figure 1.1 below outlines the typology ofapproaches that was set out from the data in the Study’s second annualreport (Kerr et al. 2004);• Factors – the identification and agreement about key school and collegelevel and learning-context level factors that work together to support,promote and champion best practice in citizenship education. For example,at school and college level these include the power of a supportive cultureand ethos, and the need for senior management support and real resources.Meanwhile, at learning-context level it is helpful to identify a ‘citizenshipchampion’ to promote and lead the area and to encourage activeapproaches which involves students in their own learning (Kerr et al.,2004; Craig et al, 2004);• Challenges – recognition of a number of key challenges that need to betackled in order for citizenship education provision to become morevisible, coherent and effective. These include addressing the challenges ofdefinition, location, teaching and learning approaches, staff training anddevelopment, assessment and self-evaluation (Kerr et al., 2004; Cleaver etal., 2005).4

Introduction, context and report focusFigure 1.1Four approaches to citizenship education in schoolsProgressing schools – developingcitizenship education in thecurriculum, school and widercommunity; the most advanced type ofprovisioncitizenship in the curriculumFocused schools – concentrating oncitizenship education in thecurriculum, with few opportunities foractive citizenship in the school andwider communityactive citizenship in the school and widercommunityImplicit schools – not yet focusing oncitizenship education in thecurriculum, but with a range of activecitizenship opportunitiesMinimalist schools – at an early stageof development, with a limited rangeof delivery approaches and few extracurricularactivities on offerIt is important to understand this consensus for it informs the context withinwhich the data in this report was collected in schools and that within which thefindings will be received.1.4 Focus of the reportThe focus of the fourth annual report is on Active Citizenship and YoungPeople. The report explores the nature and extent of the opportunities andexperiences that young people have had in relation to citizenship as an activepractice in their schools, both within the curriculum/classroom and the schoolorganisation/culture, and in wider communities (i.e. in contexts beyondschool) and the challenges involved in providing such opportunities andexperiences.This focus has been chosen deliberately. It responds to a growing recognitionof the link between citizenship education in schools and wider policyinitiatives which attempt to increase the participation and engagement ofchildren and young people in society. It is what David Bell, the former ChiefInspector of Schools 5 , has described as ‘the link between “participation” incitizenship and the “making a contribution” element of the Every ChildMatters’ programme (Bell, 2005b). Bell emphasises the significant value thateffective citizenship in schools can bring to the Every Child Matters: Changefor Children programme through a sharpened focus on participation.5David Bell has recently been appointed as the Permanent Secretary at the Department forEducation and Skills (DfES).5

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportAs he noted:In citizenship we take participation a step further through theinitiation, planning and reflection on school and ‘community action’.The definition of participation is somewhat sharper, but there are alsoclose parallels. What I can say is that a school providing goodcitizenship education is also doing well in terms of the Every ChildMatters agenda of making a contribution. (Bell, 2005b p.2)The report uses the latest quantitative and qualitative data from the Study:firstly, to update the progress of the development of citizenship education inschools generally; secondly, to probe the extent to which citizenship educationis providing opportunities and experiences of participation for young people;and, thirdly, to explore the readiness of citizenship education practice inschools to contribute to wider policy initiatives 6 , particularly the ‘make apositive contribution’ outcome in the Every Child Matters: Change forChildren programme and civil renewal action plan.The ‘make a positive contribution’ outcome is defined in the Change forChildren programme as ensuring that all children and young people are givenopportunities to:• engage in decision-making and support the community and environment;• engage in law-abiding and positive behaviour in and out of school;• develop positive relationships and choose not to bully and discriminate;• develop self-confidence and successfully deal with significant life changesand challenges;• develop enterprising behaviour.Meanwhile, a Civil Renewal Unit has been established within the HomeOffice. Civil renewal is at the heart of the government’s vision of life in 21 stcentury communities and is defined as comprising three essential ingredients(Blunkett, 2003a and b):• active citizenship – people who take responsibility for tackling theproblems they can see in their own communities;• strengthened communities – communities who can form and sustain theirown organisations, bringing people together to deal with their commonconcerns;• partnerships in meeting public needs – public bodies who involve localpeople in improving the planning and delivery of public services.6These initiatives include: the Every Child Matters: Change for Children programme, the YouthMatters green paper, the Working Together guidance and the Together We Can action plan.6

Introduction, context and report focusA civil renewal action plan, under the slogan Together We Can has been put inplace to encourage and empower people to: become actively engaged in thewell-being of their communities; be able to define the problems they face inthose communities; and to tackle those problems together with help from thegovernment and public bodies.Given its focus the report attempts to provide answers to the followingquestions:• What is the potential for citizenship education, as an active practice, (a) totake place and (b) to contribute to the Change for Children programme andcivil renewal action plan?• How far is this potential currently recognised and realised in practice?• What actions need to be taken in order for this potential to become betterrecognised and realised in practice in the present and future! by policy-makers at national and local level?! by representatives in the wider community?! by leaders, coordinators and teachers in schools?! by young people?1.5 Relevance of the report focusThe focus of this year’s report on active citizenship and young people is timelyfor four reasons. It fits with:• broadening of citizenship education policy beyond schools and increasingemphasis on the promotion of active citizenship;• perceived link between citizenship education and the wider participationand civil renewal agendas;• challenges in the effective delivery of citizenship as an active practice;• impact of change on childhood, community and society in 21 st century.Each of these reasons is explored briefly, in turn, below:1.5.1 Broadening of citizenship education policy beyond schoolsand increasing emphasis on the promotion of activecitizenshipPolicy concerning citizenship education has moved on apace since thestatutory introduction of citizenship in schools in September 2002. It hasbroadened beyond schools to encompass other education and training phasesand the wider community. This broadening has been accompanied by an7

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportincreasing emphasis on active citizenship, on citizenship as an activepractice, and its contribution to wider participation and civil renewal agendas,as witnessed by developments concerning citizenship in relation to:• 16-19 education and training;• communities; and• civil renewal.For example, the report from a second Advisory Group on Citizenship for 16-19 year olds in post-compulsory education and training (Further EducationFunding Council, 2000) contained a more specific focus on active citizenship:Young adults will only be able to realise their potential as active andeffective members of society at large, and of all kinds of public andvoluntary bodies, if those responsible for their education, training,employment and other forms of development provide the necessarymodels and learning environments for active and participativecitizenship.An in-depth exploration of the reality of the active engagement andparticipation of young people in their schools and local communities istherefore timely.1.5.2 Perceived link between citizenship education and the widerparticipation and civil renewal agendasThere has been a shift in emphasis in recent government policy to a moreparticipatory form of citizenship. This has seen conscious attempts to(re)engage people as citizens with democratic processes through the activepractice of citizenship in their daily lives. It is manifested in a number of keypolicy developments, notably:• Every Child Matters: Change for Children (HM Government, 2004)programme which seeks to achieve five outcomes in ensuring that allchildren and young people be healthy, stay safe, enjoy and achieve, makea positive contribution and achieve economic well-being, through moreintegrated children’s services, and support for change, particularly at alocal level. The programme of change is based on a multi-agencypartnership between government and statutory, voluntary, private andcommunity sectors;• Youth Matters Green Paper (GB, Parliament. HOC, 2005) which aims toencourage more young people to volunteer and become engaged with theircommunities, improve their life chances and reduce antisocial behaviour;• Working Together (DfES, 2004) which provides guidelines for schools onthe ways in which children and young people can be involved in andconsulted on many school issues;8

Introduction, context and report focus• New Framework for the Inspection of Children’s Services (HMGovernment, 2005) and revised OFSTED Framework for the Inspection ofSchools (OFSTED, 2005d) which seek to review the quality of provisionof services for children and young people at a local level, including inschools. Both frameworks follow closely the principles of the Every ChildMatters: Children for Change programme and seek to actively involvechildren and young people in the review and inspection process, andencourage local services and schools to regularly consult with students aspart of a self-evaluation and target-setting process;• Together We Can (HM Government, 2005) which sets out thegovernment’s plan of action to empower citizens to work with publicbodies to set and achieve common goals. The action plan looks to join upinitiatives across 12 government departments, including DfES. The actionplan is structured around four overarching areas, one of which is entitledCitizens and Democracy and has two actions – Together we can ensurechildren and young people have their say and Together we can strengthenour democracy.What unites these initiatives is an emphasis on actively involving people,particularly children and young people, in issues that matter to them in theireveryday lives. Involvement is based around an active, democratic processcentred on:• identifying and solving problems together;• action planning through collaborative partnerships;• taking action;• learning and applying lessons;• sharing learning and lessons with others.Citizens, including children and young people, are to be consulted, listened toand encouraged to become part of the solution, through active partnershipswith others.Though the introduction of statutory citizenship education in schools predatesthese initiatives, links have been made between the aims and processes ofexisting citizenship education in schools and the outcomes and processes ofthese broader initiatives, particularly the Every Child Matters: Change forChildren programme.Analysis of data which considers the progress of citizenship education inschools and the extent to which current citizenship education practice whichcan contribute to the Every Child Matters: Change for Children programmeand civil renewal action plan is therefore highly relevant to the conduct ofpolicy and practice, at a number of levels.9

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report1.5.3 Challenges in the effective delivery of citizenship as anactive processThe Study has highlighted in previous publications the fact that schools oftenhave difficulty with implementing the more ‘active’ elements of thecitizenship curriculum (Kerr and Cleaver, 2004). The third annual reportfound that the range of active citizenship opportunities available to youngpeople in schools remained inconsistent across the country, and that the actualtake-up of such opportunities by young people, where they existed, was low(Cleaver et al., 2005). The difficulty with implementing the more ‘active’elements of citizenship is not confined to schools. The initial Joint AreaReviews of services for children and young people in local authorities, carriedout under the New Framework for the Inspection of Children’s Services,highlight that though children and young people were encouraged toparticipate at local level there were limited opportunities for them to engagewith democratic processes and influence decision-making at council level(OFSTED, 2005e).The identification of this gap at local authority level between encouragementto participate and opportunity for participation to have an impact is asignificant finding when set alongside evidence of the challenges facingschools in delivering active citizenship. The findings support the distinction inthe literature on active citizenship and civil renewal between ‘horizontalparticipation’ and ‘vertical participation’ (Jochum et al., 2005). Horizontalparticipation relates to participation in community activities, charities, sportsclubs, associations and is less formal. Vertical participation, meanwhile,relates to participation in political affairs, including participation in politicalprocesses and governance related to the decision-making processes ininstitutions and society.Analysis of data which can explore the range and reality of active participationopportunities that exist for young people in their schools and localcommunities, and the reasons why students engage with or disengage fromsuch opportunities, is therefore crucial if a greater understanding of effectivemodels of citizenship education – in all its manifestations – is to be achieved.It also has the potential to contribute to the literature on active citizenship andcivil renewal.1.5.4 Impact of change on childhood, community and society inthe 21 st centuryIn the late 20 th and early 21 st century childhood has become increasinglyinstitutionalised. Children and young people’s unsupervised activities outsideof home and school have become ever more problematised; becomingregarded as risky to both children and to society at large (Buonfino andMulgan, 2006). Meanwhile, notions of community and belonging have beentransformed by rapid social, economic and technological change. Young10

Introduction, context and report focuspeople are as likely to be part of networks sustained by new information andcommunications technologies (ICTs) as members of local communities(Coleman, 2005). This context is important because individual, family andcommunity factors may well affect young people’s attitudes and actionsconcerning participation and the underpinning values. A greater understandingof young people’s lives, and the groups, activities and experiences, both inschool and beyond, that they find significant and meaningful is central to anyanalysis of young people’s lives, attitudes and actions in 21 st century Britain.These broader changes in community and society also have an impact onchildren and young people’s experiences of and attitudes to education andschooling. Often isolated outside of school hours in homes that can be distantfrom school, and with few spaces of their own to go to, school has become anincreasingly important social institution for young people. A greaterunderstanding of school as a social, participative and active space is alsotherefore central to any analysis of young people’s lives in 21 st centuryBritain.A combined understanding of young people’s lives, both in school andbeyond, may prove significant in identifying factors and practices thatpromote better planning and delivery of multi-agency, partnership worktowards the meaningful participation of children and young people in society.This partnership approach, particularly at a local level, is central to ensuringsuccessful and sustained outcomes for the Every Child Matters: Change forChildren programme and Together We Can action plan.1.6 Structure of the reportThe report is structured in response to the overarching questions which ariseout of the focus on active citizenship and young people and which, as a result,drive the analysis of the data. Following this opening chapter, whichintroduces and sets the context for the report:• Chapter 2 focuses on current approaches to citizenship education inschools and sets the wider context within which active citizenship is takingplace. It considers changes in approach to citizenship education in schoolsthrough a comparison of data from the first longitudinal survey in 2003and the second in 2005: How are schools approaching citizenshipeducation? What delivery models and teaching and learning approachesare they using? What are the key challenges for school leaders andteachers? What is the impact of citizenship education?• Chapter 3 addresses knowledge and understanding of rights andresponsibilities: What rights and responsibilities do students feel theyhave in school? Are students provided with the requisite information andexperiences which help them to understand the school, local and nationalservices and democratic structures that affect their everyday lives? How11

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportwell does citizenship education contribute to students’ knowledge andunderstanding of decision-making processes in school and beyond?• Chapter 4 explores active participation and skills of participation:What opportunities do students have to take an active part in lessons and toparticipate more widely in school? How far do students have a voice in thewider community? Are the opportunities provided enabling students togain the necessary skills to take part in making decisions that affect theirlives – at both school and community level?• Chapter 5 examines community and belonging: What factors influencestudents’ feelings of belonging to school? How far do they have a sense ofbelonging to the wider community? How does a sense of community andbelonging affect how students view opportunities and experiences ofactive citizenship in practice?• Chapter 6 is entitled moving active citizenship forward and reviews thecentral questions posed in the introduction concerning young people’sopportunities and experiences of active citizenship and their contributionto wider participation and civil renewal agendas. What are the keychallenges to the promotion of citizenship as an active practice in schools?How far are schools equipped to overcome these challenges and moveforward? How can active citizenship be made meaningful and real for allyoung people, beginning in school and spreading out, in the 21 st century?The supporting appendices include: references; information about themethodology and sampling procedures for the second longitudinal survey andschool case-study visits; and further background about the Study.12

Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an update2. Approaches to citizenship education inschools: an updateKey findings• The proportion of schools described as progressing and implicit, in the typologyof schools developed in 2003, remained largely unchanged in 2005. However,the proportion of schools described as minimalist decreased, while theproportion described as focused increased. This suggests that the main changein approach has been an increased focus on curriculum aspects of citizenshipeducation provision.• Schools continued to use a variety of citizenship delivery models. However,there was a notable increase in the use of dedicated timeslots and in the use ofassembly time. Teachers were more likely in 2005, than in 2003, to believe thatcitizenship education was best approached as a specific subject and throughextra-curricular activities.• School leaders and teachers were more familiar with a range of key documentsrelated to citizenship education in 2005 than in 2003. It was notable that schoolleaders’ awareness of these documents was higher than that of teachers.• Teacher confidence in teaching citizenship-related topics saw a moderateincrease in 2005, although overall confidence levels remained relatively low.• Students were more aware of citizenship in 2005 than in 2003, with theproportion saying that they have learned about citizenship ‘a lot’ increasingfrom 16 to 24 per cent. The main ways in which they reported learning aboutcitizenship were: through PSHE, religious education, as a discrete subject andtutor groups.• Descriptions of citizenship education that encompassed ‘active’ components,such as voting and politics, were relatively uncommon amongst students,although a sizeable proportion identified the importance of belonging to thecommunity.• Although traditional teaching and learning methods continued to dominate, arange of more active methods were also used. There was also an increase inthe use of computers, the internet and external agencies, and a decrease in theuse of textbooks.• There was a substantial increase in the proportion of schools with anassessment policy for citizenship education in 2005, and the use of formalassessment methods was considerably more widespread than in 2003.• Teachers received more training in 2005 than in 2003. Despite this there was ahigh demand for further training in relation to subject matter, assessment andreporting and teaching methods.• School leaders and teachers were substantially more likely in 2005, than in2003, to believe that citizenship education had some impact on a range ofissues including voting behaviour, student participation and consultation.• The main challenges to citizenship education were felt, by school leaders andteachers, to include time pressure, assessment, the status of citizenship andteachers’ subject expertise with student engagement and participation seen aslesser challenges.13

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportThis chapter provides an update on the current state of citizenship education inschools using data from the longitudinal survey 7 . It focuses on the question:how are schools approaching citizenship education in 2005? Whereappropriate, it compares data from the first longitudinal survey in 2003 withthe second survey in 2005, in order to comment on changes in approach overtime. The main purpose of the chapter is to establish the wider context withinwhich young people’s opportunities and experiences of active citizenship – ofcitizenship as an active practice – is taking place in schools.The chapter considers citizenship education in schools in terms of:• overall approach;• curriculum location;• school leader and teacher confidence;• topics that are taught;• student definitions of citizenship;• teaching and learning approaches and use of resources;• assessment strategies;• staff training opportunities, and;• impact and major challenges.Data from the longitudinal survey concerning active citizenship education inschools is incorporated into Chapter 4. This data considers:• links between the curriculum, school culture and wider community;• opportunities for students to be involved in citizenship as an activepractice within the classroom and school culture;• opportunities for students to be involved in citizenship as an activepractice in the wider community.2.1 Overall approach to citizenship educationThe Study’s second annual report (Kerr et al., 2004) contained a typologywhich summarised the overall approach of schools in 2003 to the delivery ofcitizenship. Schools were broadly classified in terms of two dimensions: theirimplementation of citizenship education in the curriculum and their provisionof opportunities for active citizenship in the school and wider community.7The longitudinal survey is based on a nationally representative sample of schools and therefore thefindings are representative of how schools are approaching citizenship education across thecountry.14

Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an updateAn analysis of their delivery approach was undertaken using these dimensions.The resulting typology identified four types of school approach to citizenshipeducation in 2003 (see Figure 2.1 below):• progressing;• focused;• implicit;• minimalist.Figure 2.1Four approaches to citizenship education in schoolsProgressing schools – developingcitizenship education in thecurriculum, school and widercommunity; the most advanced type ofprovisioncitizenship in the curriculumFocused schools – concentrating oncitizenship education in thecurriculum, with few opportunities foractive citizenship in the school andwider communityactive citizenship in the school and widercommunityImplicit schools – not yet focusing oncitizenship education in thecurriculum, but with a range of activecitizenship opportunitiesMinimalist schools – at an early stageof development, with a limited rangeof delivery approaches and few extracurricularactivities on offerIn 2003, when the longitudinal survey schools were classified for the firsttime, about one-quarter of the schools surveyed fell into each of the fourcategories.The delivery approach of the longitudinal survey schools was re-analysed in2005, using the same classification, in order to map the extent of changes indelivery approach between 2003 and 2005. The results are shown in Figures2.2 and 2.3 below:15

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportFigure 2.2 Typology of schools in 2003Minimalist,21%Progressing,24%Implicit, 26%Focused,29%Source: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005Figure 2.3 Typology of schools in 2005Minimalist,11%Progressing,24%Implicit, 24%Focused,42%Source: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005The figures highlight that between 2003 and 2005, the proportion of schoolsdescribed as progressing and implicit 8 remained largely the same at aroundone-quarter of all schools. The main change in 2005 was a decrease in theproportion of schools offering minimalist citizenship provision (21 per cent in2003 down to 11 per cent in 2005), and a corresponding rise in the proportionclassified as offering focused citizenship provision (29 per cent in 2003 risingto 42 per cent in 2005).8For a description of the terms progressing and implicit see Figure 2.1.16

Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an updateIn addition, there was considerable movement of schools between approachtypes, 9 indicating the loose connections between schools’ current approach tocitizenship education and their approach in 2003. The only type of change thatwas not observed was progressing schools becoming minimalist over the twoyears. However, movement of schools between all other categories wasobserved.The observed changes suggest that approaches to citizenship education havenot yet stabilised within schools and are continuing to evolve and develop.While they are positive, in that the proportion of schools offering minimalistcitizenship provision has halved, they do not show an increase in the numberof progressing schools, as might have been expected. Rather they suggest themain change in approach to citizenship education in schools has seen aconcentration on the curriculum aspects of citizenship education at theexpense of more active elements in the school and community. This isevidenced in the rise of focused schools. This change can be explained by anumber of factors, including the reported difficulties schools experience withdeveloping links between the citizenship curriculum, school community andwider community (Kerr et al., 2003), and an increase in the use of the GCSEshort course. It is perhaps to be expected given the strong drive in schools oneffective curriculum delivery in all subjects, and the classification ofcitizenship as a new national curriculum subject. Interestingly, the changecoincides with OFSTED’s tightening of the inspection of citizenship as astatutory national curriculum subject in schools.2.2 Citizenship in the curriculumSchools were also asked about the main ways in which they deliveredcitizenship education and the results are shown in Figure 2.4 below. It is clearthat schools were using a wide variety of ways to deliver citizenshipeducation. The main methods included through assemblies, modules in PSHEand through extra-curricular activities. While the range of approaches inschools has remained stable between 2003 and 2005 there was some change inthe prevalence of certain delivery approaches. The most notable changes werean increase in the use of a dedicated timeslot for citizenship, particularly inKey Stage 4, and an increase in the use of assembly time. The increased use ofdedicated timeslots at Key Stage 4 can be explained, in part, by the greatertake-up in schools of the new GCSE citizenship studies short course.9In 2003, school leader questionnaires were received from 84 of the 112 schools which took part inthe longitudinal survey. In 2005, 81 of the original 112 schools took part in the second longitudinalsurvey and, on this occasion, school leader questionnaires were received from all these 81 schools.The present findings are based on 65 schools for which school leader questionnaires were receivedin 2003 and 2005.17

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportFigure 2.4Methods used by schools to deliver citizenship education,2003 and 2005AssembliesModules in PSHEExtra-curricular activitiesDelivery methodsIntegrated all subjectsTutorialsSpecial eventsDedicated time slotIntegrated selected subjectsModules in other subjects0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Pecentage of schoolsKey stage 3 (2005) Key stage 4 (2005) 2003 (Key stages 3 and 4)N = 81 schools in 2005, 84 schools in 2003Please note: in 2005 schools were asked to give information on Key Stage 3 and 4 delivery methods,whereas in 2003 schools were not asked to make this distinctionSource: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005, 2003A comparison of teachers’ views of the most effective ways of deliveringcitizenship education, between 2003 and 2005, highlights teacher support forchanges in approach to citizenship in schools. Figure 2.5 below shows thatwhile teachers advocated the use of a range of approaches, there was increasedsupport for the delivery of citizenship as a specific subject and through extracurricularactivities. There was a slight decrease in support for the delivery ofcitizenship through PSHE (Personal Social and Health Education) and throughall curriculum subjects.18

Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an updateFigure 2.5Teachers’ views of the most effective ways of deliveringcitizenship education, 2003 and 2005PSHEAll subjectsMost effective deliveryExtra-curricularIn some subjectsIn tutorialsSpecific subject0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Percentage of teachers2003 2005N = 301 teachers in 2005, 387 teachers in 2003Source: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005, 20032.3 School leader and teacher confidence about citizenshipComparison between the longitudinal survey data from 2003 and that from2005 reveals signs of growing familiarity and acceptance of citizenship inschools and increased school leader and teacher confidence about its aims andcurriculum content. It should be remembered that citizenship was onlyintroduced into schools in September 2002 and was therefore very new whenschools were surveyed in 2003. It is to be expected that, as schools work withthe new curriculum, so their familiarity with it leads to growing levels ofconfidence about what it includes and how it should be delivered.2.3.1 Familiarity with key citizenship documentsComparison between the data from 2003 and 2005 shows that school leaders’familiarity with key documents for citizenship has increased over the twoyears. The proportion of school leaders who felt very familiar with thefollowing documents, was as follows:• National Curriculum Order for Citizenship Education (35 per cent ofschool leaders in 2003, 41 per cent of school leaders in 2005);• Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (QCA) Key Stage 3 schemes ofwork for citizenship (26 per cent in 2003, 35 per cent in 2005);19

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report• QCA Key Stage 4 schemes of work for citizenship (21 per cent in 2003,31 per cent in 2005);• Crick Report (10 per cent in 2003, 15 per cent in 2005);• Department for Education and Skills (DfES) citizenship website (13 percent in 2003, 19 per cent in 2005);• OFSTED inspection guidance for citizenship (21 per cent in 2003, 35 percent in 2005);• QCA assessment guidance for citizenship (10 per cent in 2003, 30 per centin 2005).Teachers who responded to the survey in 2005 were also more familiar withkey documents than teachers in 2003. However, typically smaller proportionsof teachers described themselves as very familiar with the key documentscompared to school leaders (for example, 41 per cent of school leaders saidthat they were very familiar with the national curriculum Order for citizenshipcompared to 22 per cent of teachers in 2005). This may be because citizenshipis taught in schools by a range of teachers, including many non-specialists,who may work with schemes of work based on the citizenship Order, butdrawn up by the citizenship coordinator.It is encouraging, however, that, a somewhat higher proportion of teachers in2005 reported that they understood the aims and purposes of citizenshipeducation (76 per cent in 2003 compared to 83 per cent in 2005).2.3.2 Teacher confidence in citizenship-related topicsFigure 2.6 below compares levels of teacher confidence about teachingcitizenship-related topics in 2003 and 2005. It highlights a moderate increasein teacher confidence across all the topics from 2003 to 2005 as a result of twomore years’ experience of teaching these topics in their schools. However, italso shows that teachers remain more confident about teaching somecitizenship-related topics than others. Topics in which teachers show thehighest levels of confidence include the environment, crime and punishment,the media and resolving conflict. They reveal lowest levels of confidence inteaching the topics of economy and businesses, the EU (European Union) andconsumer rights. It is not clear how this confidence relates to actual teachingapproaches with students. Whilst it is true that confidence levels haveincreased over the past two years, it should also be noted that the increase isrelative. Closer examination of the figures reveals that overall teacherconfidence levels remain relatively low. Only in relation to one citizenshiprelatedtopic (the environment) did over half the teachers who responded to thesurvey report feeling ‘very confident’ about teaching it.20

Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an updateFigure 2.6Teachers’ confidence in teaching different citizenshiprelatedtopics in 2003 and 2005EnvironmentCrime and punishmentResolving conflictThe mediaDifferent cultures and ethnic groupsHuman rightsTopicsRights and responsibilitiesVoting and electionsThe global communityVoluntary groupsConsumer rightsThe EUEconomy and businesses0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70Percentage of teachers (very confident)2003 2005Please note: in order to make the graph clear the axis showing the percentage of teachers who werevery confident, runs from 0 to 70 per cent, not 100 per centN = 301 teachers in 2005, 387 teachers in 2003Source: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005, 20032.4 Learning about citizenshipYoung people were more aware of citizenship in 2005 than they were in 2003.Nearly a quarter (24 per cent) of students said that they learned aboutcitizenship a lot and over two fifths of students said that they learned aboutcitizenship a little. Only five per cent said that they were not taught aboutcitizenship at all. Comparison with the data from 2003 reveals that theproportion of students who said that they learned about citizenship a lot hadincreased over the two years (16 per cent of Year 7 students in 2003 said thatthey learned about citizenship a lot).The lessons in which Year 9 students reported learning about citizenship in2005 were:• Personal, Social and Health Education (PSHE) (57 per cent);• Religious Education or Studies (35 per cent);• Citizenship lessons (30 per cent);• Tutor groups (29 per cent);• History (18 per cent);• English (16 per cent);21

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report• Other lessons (16 per cent);• Life skills (15 per cent);• Geography (13 per cent);• Politics (10 per cent);• Business studies/Economics (nine per cent);• Science (eight per cent);• General studies (eight per cent);• Sociology (seven per cent).In 2005, students responding to the survey were asked to indicate their viewson what citizenship means to them. Figure 2.7 below shows that studentstended to view some of the more active components, such as being active inthe community, and voting and politics, as quite low on their list ofdefinitions. However, a higher proportion (24 per cent) identified belongingto the community as an important element. This view is explored further, andsubstantiated, in Chapter 5 and the implications for the development of activecitizenship opportunities are discussed in Chapter 6.Figure 2.7 Students’ definitions of citizenship, 2005403530Percentage of students2520151050Fair treatment for allBeing a good citizenResponsibilities and obeying the lawStanding up for beliefsBelonging to your communityWorking togetherPeople's rightsLooking after environmentDefinitions of citizenshipSharing ideas/listeningBeing active in communityVoting, politics and governmentPlease note: in order to make the graph clear the axis showing the percentage of students whosupported each definition runs from 0 to 40 per cent, not 100 per centN = 13,643 studentsSource: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 200522

Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an update2.5 Teaching and learning approaches and resourcesAs is shown in Figure 2.8, the most frequently used teaching and learningmethods, reported by teachers in 2005, were relatively traditional methodssuch as talking whilst the class listened and working from textbooks.However, a range of active methods, such as working in groups and exploring,discussing and debating issues, were also used frequently. This reflects thedata collected from the students who reported that, whilst traditional methodswere still dominant, there were some opportunities for participation in theclassroom (see Section 4.1.1).Figure 2.8Most commonly used teaching and learning approachesTeaching and learning approachesListen while teacher talksWork in groupsWork from textbooks/worksheetsExplore/discuss/debate issuesResearch & analyse informationTake notesGive presentationsWatch TV/videosUse computers/the internetRecord own achievementsDo role-play/drama0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Percentage of teachers saying they use approach 'sometimes' or 'often'2003 2005N = 387 teachers in 2003; 301 teachers in 2005Source: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005, 2003Comparison with data from 2003 shows that the most salient change inteaching and learning methods was the increase in the use of computers andthe internet. This change is also reflected in the resources that teachersreported using in 2003 and 2005: the proportion of teachers that reported usingICT increased over this time from 67 per cent in 2003 to 74 per cent in 2005.In addition, teachers appeared to have become less reliant on textbooks with71 per cent reporting that they used textbooks sometimes or often in 2003,whilst in 2005 this figure has fallen to 63 per cent. (See Table 2.1 below).Overall, however, teachers drew upon the same kinds of resources in 2005 asthey did in 2003, particularly their own ideas, the media and originalresources.23

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportTable 2.1Resources used often/sometimes in planningcitizenship educationResources2003%teachers2005%teachersOwn ideas 89 88Media 85 85Original sources 72 73ICT 67 74Textbooks 71 63Commercial materials 63 66Official curricular guidelines 53 48National standards for citizenship 46 45N = 387 301Percentage of teachers saying they use resources ‘sometimes’ or ‘often’More than one response could be given so percentages do not sum to 100Source: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005, 2003In addition, in 2005, more teachers reported using external people in theteaching of citizenship-related topics (63 per cent, up from 47 per cent in2003).In 2005, almost three-quarters (73 per cent) of teachers indicated that they hadaccess to computers and the internet for citizenship education lessons andactivities. This is similar to 2003 (when 71 per cent reported having suchaccess). However, in 2005, a greater proportion of the teachers who had accessto the internet used it for the following citizenship education activities:• Researching topical issues and events (73 per cent in 2003 and 88 per centin 2005);• Planning lessons and activities (72 per cent in 2003 and 81 per cent in2005);• Lessons with students (58 per cent in 2003 and 76 per cent in 2005).2.6 AssessmentBetween 2003 and 2005, the assessment of citizenship appears to haveincreased in importance for schools. The percentage of schools having anassessment policy for citizenship education increased substantially over thetwo years (from 24 to 53 per cent for Key Stage 3, and from 25 to 49 per centfor Key Stage 4). This may be linked to an increase in familiarity with theQCA assessment guidance in schools. In 2005, three times more schoolleaders than in 2003 (30 versus 10 per cent) reported being very familiar with24

Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an updatethe guidance, and more teachers (45 per cent) reported being at least quitefamiliar with the same guidance (an increase from 31 per cent in 2003).Changes in the methods of assessment and recognition of achievement usedwere also apparent from the school leaders’ survey, with formal assessmentbecoming more widespread in 2005 than in 2003. As more schools becamefocused citizenship schools (see Section 2.1), so in 2005 more schools than in2003 were using the GCSE short course (17 per cent in 2003 compared to 33per cent in 2005) or non-GCSE qualifications (20 per cent in 2003 comparedto 42 per cent in 2005) at Key Stage 4. However, over the same period, therewas a decrease in the use of awards or certificates at Key Stage 3 (from 46 percent in 2003 to 37 per cent in 2005).As far as methods of assessment are concerned, at both key stages, there wasan increase in the proportion of schools using written tasks (from 19 to 32 percent at Key Stage 3, and 21 to 28 per cent at Key Stage 4) and peer assessment(from 13 to 25 per cent at Key Stage 3, and 13 to 19 per cent at Key Stage 4).At Key Stage 4, this was accompanied by a decrease in self-assessment (from45 to 37 per cent) and the use of portfolios (from 39 to 25 per cent).2.7 Staff training opportunitiesComparison of the 2003 and 2005 reveals an increase in the take-up oftraining about citizenship by teachers (up from 37 per cent of teachers in 2003to 46 per cent in 2005). However, this increase needs to be set within theoverall context that over half the teachers surveyed in 2005 (54 per cent)reported that they had received no training. This suggests that there is still aconsiderable way to go before all those who currently teach citizenship havereceived any training in the new subject. Most of those teachers who had hadtraining reported that they had found the training either very or quite useful(60 per cent of these who had received internal training and 57 per cent ofthose who had received external training).There was limited change between 2003 and 2005 in those who provided thetraining in citizenship for teachers. The main training provider remained localauthorities (59 per cent of teachers surveyed in 2005 reported receiving suchtraining up from 51 per cent in 2003), followed by commercial organisations(33 per cent in 2005 compared to 34 per cent in 2003) and citizenshiporganisations (28 per cent in 2005 down from 37 per cent in 2005).Interestingly, there was little recognition of the new Association forCitizenship Teaching (ACT) among teachers. There was a slight increase inthose reporting membership (up from four per cent in 2003 to nine per cent in2005) but over two-thirds of teachers (68 per cent) replied that they did notknow if they were members. It may be that some schools have taken outinstitutional membership and that the teachers in these schools are unaware of25

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportthis. However, the findings highlight the considerable work still to be done toraise awareness among teachers about the professional support networks thatare available to them.There was also a high demand for further training on citizenship from teachers(70 per cent reported needing additional training in 2005 compared to 74 percent in 2003). The nature of the training requested remained relativelyconstant between 2003 and 2005. The main areas where training wasrequested were subject matter (52 per cent of teachers in 2005 compared to 53per cent in 2005), assessment and reporting (56 per cent in 2005 down from 63per cent in 2003) and teaching methods (33 per cent in 2005 and 44 per cent in2003). This underlines the continued request from teachers for further trainingin the new subject of citizenship in order to build their knowledge,understanding and expertise in delivering it in their schools.2.8 Impact and challenges of citizenship educationThe 2005 data reveals that a proportion of school leaders (a third or more)believe that the introduction of citizenship education into the schoolcurriculum will have at least some impact on a series of student and schoolrelatedoutcomes. (See Figure 2.9 below.) Compared to 2003, there was atendency for fewer school leaders to indicate, in 2005, that citizenship wouldhave no impact on students’ participation in school 10 . However, school leadersperceived the main impact of citizenship to be on students’ actions andactivities beyond the school, through future voting and participation in thecommunity.10A direct comparison between the 2003 and the 2005 data is not possible due to the updating of thequestionnaire’s measurement scales in the interim period.26

Approaches to citizenship education in schools: an updateFigure 2.9Schools leader views on the impact of citizenshipConsulting with studentsFuture voting behaviourImpact of citizneshipSchools relationships with thecommunityStudents' participation in thecommunityStudents participation inschoolStudents' confidenceBehaviour of students0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Some or large impactPlease note: in order to make the graph clear the axis showing the percentage of school leader viewson the impact of citizenship runs from 0 to 80 per cent, not 100 per centN = 81 schoolsSource: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005Figure 2.10 below shows teachers’ and school leaders’ views on the mainchallenges for citizenship education in 2005.Figure 2.10 Main challenges for citizenship educationPressure on timeAssessmentChallenges of citizenshipStatus of citizenship educationSubject expertiseTrainingEngaging studentsLinks with local communityStudent participation in theschool0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80PercentageTeacherSchool LeaderPlease note: in order to make the graph clear the axis showing the main challenges for citizenshipeducation runs from 0 to 85 per cent, not 100 per centN = 301 teachers; 81 school leadersSource: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 200527

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportTeachers and school leaders who responded to the survey indicated that theyfelt that the main challenges for the delivery of citizenship education related todelivery of citizenship through the curriculum, such as pressure on time,assessment, the status of citizenship and teachers’ subject expertise. Issuesrelating to engaging students, links with the local community and participationin school were seen as less pressing challenges.This chapter has explored how schools were approaching citizenshipeducation in 2005. It has highlighted, among other things, changes in deliverymodels, the increased confidence of teachers and school leaders with keydocuments relating to citizenship and the increase in assessment policies forcitizenship. Overall, the chapter sets the context within which young people’sopportunities and experiences of active citizenship is taking place in schools.The following three chapters explore in more detail particular opportunitiesthat young people have to be active in and beyond schools. Chapter 3examines young people’s understanding of and opportunities to be involved indecision-making within school.28

Knowledge and understanding3. Knowledge and understandingKey findings• Students appeared to be well equipped to participate actively in school life andto make a positive contribution. They recognised that they have responsibilitiesin school and, whilst they were keen to highlight their right to have a voiceregarding school matters, they also recognised the rights to a voice of othergroups. Moreover, they demonstrated considerable sophistication whenexplaining who should have a say about school life and why.• Students often linked becoming adult members of society to the acquisition ofrights and, to a lesser extent, to the capacity to take up responsibilities. Theyunderstood that many civic and political rights are age related and were awareof a series of issues which should be considered when deciding at what point aright, such as voting, should be awarded to young people.• Students believed that citizenship education has contributed to their awarenessand understanding of issues such as current affairs, politics and their rights.However, some teachers highlighted differences in student attitudes, in that notall students benefit from, or are receptive to, citizenship education to the sameextent.• Furthermore, not all students had the same level of understanding ofparticipation mechanisms and the decision-making process within the schooland beyond that how these affect their everyday lives. These are areas wherethere is scope for citizenship education to contribute more, both throughteaching and learning in the curriculum and through the provision of activecitizenship opportunities within school.This chapter examines whether young people in case-study schools havesufficient knowledge and understanding to enable them to participate activelyand effectively in the life of the school and beyond. It also looks at thecontribution of citizenship education to their acquisition of knowledge andunderstanding. In order to do this, the chapter looks at:• students’ understanding of rights, responsibilities and decision making inschool;• students’ understanding of rights, responsibilities and decision makingbeyond school;• the contribution of citizenship education towards students’ levels ofknowledge and understanding.29

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report3.1 Understanding of rights, responsibilities and decisionmaking in schoolThis first section considers students’ understanding and awareness of therights, responsibilities and decision-making opportunities they have withinschool.3.1.1 Rights and responsibilities in schoolAcross the ten case-study schools, the students interviewed felt that they hadcertain key responsibilities in their schools, which included:• learning/keeping up with school work;• keeping the school tidy/free from litter;• social stewardship towards other students (for example, passing oninformation to younger students and, in particular, making Year 7 studentsfeel comfortable in their new school surroundings).Only one group of Key Stage 3 students did not perceive themselves to haveany responsibilities at all. In contrast to the views expressed by other studentsthey felt that: ‘They should give us more’; ‘We owe the school nothing. Theywouldn’t have a job if it wasn’t for us’.Although students generally believed that they had certain responsibilities inschool they also felt that they had a right to have their voice heard onmatters that affected them, such as:• school uniform and grooming rules;• the school physical environment and facilities;• the name of the school and school merging processes;• school rules;• catering (e.g. choice of food);• subject options available;• how lessons should be conducted;• what they should be taught;• decisions that affected them more generally.Students resented decisions on these matters being taken without them beingconsulted or given an explanation of the rationale underlying decisions made.Whilst one student expressed the view that students were not mature enough tomake decisions about school life, because they would, for example, choose tohave holidays from school every day and therefore would not learn much, the30

Knowledge and understandingmajority of students interviewed were confident about their right to a voice.They also generally acknowledged the rights of voice of others, such asteachers. In only two schools were there some students who thought thatstudents alone should have a final say regarding their school life.Mostly, students identified teachers, as well as students, as those best placed tohave the right to have a say about students’ school life. However, sometimesthe headteacher was thought to be the one who should have the final say,albeit after consultation with students and, for some, with teachers. Somestudents thought that parents and/or the government should have an input intodecisions. However, others considered that parents and the government, aswell as school governors, were out of touch with the daily realities of schoollife and so should not have much of a say in what happened there. Thefollowing illustration demonstrates the continuum of opinions expressed bystudents about their rights to voice in school.Students have themost right to a say:‘We should put an ideaforward and then weshould decide if wewant it or not’ (KeyStage 3 student)Students have a rightto have their voiceheard:‘I don’t think we shouldhave the final say, butwe should definitely beconsulted about it’. (KeyStage 4 student)Students should nothave a say:‘Teachers [should makethe decisions aboutstudents’ school life]because students aren’tmature enough’. (KeyStage 4 student)Students showed considerable sophistication when presenting their viewsabout their rights of voice and how much of an input others should have. Theirviews on this matter tended to be underpinned by the followingconsiderations:• considerations about the level of information, expertise, maturity orexperience of each individual or group of people;• the stakes which individuals have in school life;• the contribution which different groups make to school life;• concerns about fairness.31

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportThese considerations are captured in more detail in the following illustrations:RationaleInformation, expertiseand experience ofdifferent groupsStakes in school lifeContribution ofdifferent groups toschool lifeEnsuring fairnessExamples‘The issues in one school aren’t going to be thesame as in another school … the government gets ageneral say and that is agreeable, but if oneheadmaster is given what they have to do for thatschool and it doesn’t work, then they shouldn’t haveto stick to it.. (Key Stage 4 student)‘[Parents also have right to be heard] becauseparents want you to be safe at school and have agood time.’ (Key Stage 3 student)‘[Government should have a say.] Well, they providethe money, don’t they?’ (Key Stage 4 student)‘I think the way that it works now is a good thing … ifthe government set our curriculum then each child islearning the same sort of thing based around thesame topics. If [this was not the case,] …one schoolcould choose… really easy topics and one schoolcould choose… really hard topics and it wouldn’t befair.’ (Key Stage 3 student)As part of this thinking, students acknowledged a series of factors that may putothers in a better position to participate in decisions about their school life. Forinstance, some students recognised that teachers and government haveexpertise and experience that can be helpful in deciding what best to include inlessons. In contrast, when discussing whether they, themselves, should havesome say about how lessons are run and what they should be taught, somestudents highlighted the limitations of students’ potential input, on the groundsthat they had minimal knowledge of what there is that could be learned.This degree of thoughtfulness about the rights of voice of a range ofindividuals suggests that students are generally well equipped to participate indebates and decision-making processes within schools.3.1.2 Factors influencing perceptions of rights andresponsibilities in schoolStudents’ views about rights and responsibilities in school appeared to dependmainly on the individual characteristics of the students, although there wassome indication that views also varied between schools, because of theinfluence of schools’ ethos and/or intake.32

Knowledge and understandingAge and maturity appeared to be key influences on how students thoughtabout rights and responsibilities. In two schools, Key Stage 3 studentsacknowledged considerably fewer responsibilities than their Key Stage 4peers: one group of Key Stage 3 students did not identify any responsibilitiesat all and the other did not think that they had responsibilities in relation toother students, although they did feel that students had responsibilities towardsteachers and parents. Also, the young people mentioned in Section 3.1.1.above, who thought that students should have the decisive say regardingschool decisions, were Key Stage 3 students. This suggests that perceivingothers as having equal rights to voice may be something which develops withage and maturity.Other factors that appeared to be associated with perceptions ofresponsibilities included:• values, such as valuing education – Two Key Stage 4 students stated: ‘Weshould treat [teachers] with respect. They are trying to give us aneducation’ and ‘You should treat everyone else with respect because theyare trying to get an education’;• parental expectations – One Key Stage 4 student commented: ‘If I gotworse marks than my mum expected… she would be disappointed in meand I would hate it’;• preoccupations with fairness and equity – Another Key Stage 4 studentexplained: ‘If I got a bad grade from a good teacher, then I’d feelresponsible as they’d not look like as good a teacher as they actually are’;• perceptions that certain behaviours pay back – A Key Stage 4 studentnoted: ‘How can [teachers] respect you if you don’t show them anyrespect?’;• the fact that roles held entail responsibilities (e.g. being a formrepresentative and therefore having to represent others). This point wasemphasised by a number of students.Whilst across schools students consistently perceived themselves as havingboth rights and responsibilities, some of their considerations aboutresponsibilities appeared to be influenced by the ethos of the school and/orthe type of community from which schools drew their student intake. In onehigh achieving school, students explicitly talked about their academicresponsibilities in terms of keeping grades high and, in another school withstrong academic results, students discussed the importance of maintaining theschool’s good reputation through their hard work. On the other hand, thegroup of Key Stage 3 students, mentioned in Section 3.1.1 above, who did notbelieve that they had any responsibilities attended a school where, as reportedby their Key Stage 4 peers, some students disrespected teachers, reportedlyswearing at them, for example. It is possible that the students who perceivedthemselves not to have responsibilities and those who reportedly disrespected33

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportteachers belonged to a subgroup of students in the school that come frombackgrounds where young people were disaffected vis-à-vis education andauthority.3.2 Understanding of rights, responsibilities and decisionmaking beyond schoolStudents were very aware that the acquisition of many civic and politicalrights is related to age, for instance, smoking and getting married at 16, andbeing able to vote and buy alcohol at 18. Many highlighted, what theyperceived to be, inconsistencies in the awarding of rights, since different rightsare awarded at different ages. The acquisition of rights appeared to mark animportant change in their social status from the students’ perspective. Indeed,many cited the acquisition of certain rights at a given age as a reason foridentifying that stage of life as the time when you become an adult. Rightswhich were mentioned as markers of adulthood were varied and included theright to get married, the right to smoke, the right to have children and the rightto vote.Although many students associated the process of growing up and becomingan adult with the acquisition of rights, some also linked adulthood with acapacity for taking up responsibilities. For instance, they mentioned theimportance of being mature, being able to make one’s own decisions andtaking financial responsibility for themselves as markers of adulthood. OneKey Stage 3 student illustrated the association of both rights andresponsibilities with adulthood, as well as the questioning of the fact thatdifferent rights are awarded at different ages as follows: ‘I think you should be[an adult] when you are 16, because you are responsible, you can smoke – sowhy can’t you drink?’ However, it was noticeable that young peopleidentifying the key markers of adulthood as marriage, smoking, havingchildren and voting, for example, tended to identify these markers as rights,rather than responsibilities. For example, they identified the right to smoke ordrink rather than the importance of doing so with consideration for others andthe right to have children, rather then the responsibility of parenthood.Opinions were split across groups of students regarding the voting age. Whilesome students believed it should be lowered others argued that it should not.In part, this lack of consensus was due to different views about when youngpeople are mature enough to make voting decisions. There was often nocorrespondence between the age at which students thought that they shouldhave the right to vote and when they thought they would become adults. Thismay have been due to beliefs such as those expressed in one group that peoplecan mature in different areas at different rates, which could mean that whilstsomeone could be mature enough to vote, they might not be mature enough inother areas to be considered an adult.34

Knowledge and understanding3.3 The contribution of citizenship education to knowledgeand understandingThe final section considers the extent to which the levels of knowledge andunderstanding outlined in this chapter may have been influenced by students’citizenship education programmes in school.3.3.1 The contribution of citizenship education to knowledge andunderstanding of decision-making processes?Students felt that citizenship education was useful in helping them to formtheir opinions and in providing greater knowledge and understanding, inparticular in relation to political processes, politics and voting. The particulargains provided through citizenship education which students identified were:• forming or changing their opinions on the issues covered;• feeling more confident about voicing their own opinions about politicaland topical issues due to being more knowledgeable about them;• becoming more aware of issues relative to their rights and the law;• learning about issues of interest to them, such as drugs, AIDS and HIV,the media and racism.It would appear that the knowledge and understanding which studentsdemonstrated when discussing their rights and responsibilities in the schoolcommunity and beyond, as well as their confidence in voicing such opinions,can in part be attributed to the influence of the explicit teaching of citizenshipeducation that they had received in their schools.In four case-study schools, the Key Stage 4 students who took part in thediscussions were particularly keen to highlight the impact that their citizenshipeducation lessons had had on their political literacy. This is illustrated throughthe following discussion with one group of Key Stage 4 students.Student A:Others:Student A:Student B:Voicing our opinions about politics [is something citizenshiphas helped me with].Yeah!This year, I’ve taken a lot more interest in politics because Iknow a bit more about it, so I was voicing my opinion a bitmore.I certainly felt this year that I understand a lot more about theindividual parties, about what they’re actually standing for…You don’t discuss it in things like geography. Citizenship isthe only way for people of our age group to start tounderstand politics, especially.’35

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportIn two of these schools, citizenship education was delivered through thecitizenship GCSE short course. Meanwhile, in the other two schools seniormanagement support for citizenship education was high, with one being acitizenship specialist humanities school and the other a school where seniormanagement placed great emphasis on experiential citizenship learning andwhere student voice was highly developed and valued in the school. Thisindicates that education for citizenship may be particularly successful inengaging students either where they are taught political literacy as part of acitizenship short course in a context where good academic results are valued,or where the school ethos which senior management encourage is consistentwith the aims of citizenship education.However, some students felt that they had not gained much from citizenshipeducation that was useful in their wider lives in school or outside. This waseither because they felt that they had covered the topics before, and wouldhave been able to pick up what was covered in citizenship in other subjects orin normal life, or because they felt that citizenship did little to change the waythey thought. On the other hand, some of the students who were not verypositive about how much they had learned in citizenship put it down to thedelivery of the subject rather than its potential: not having covered the topicsin sufficient depth, and some teachers not having given them enough direction,for instance, when researching information.3.3.2 Can citizenship education contribute to the knowledge andunderstanding of all students to the same extent?Whilst two citizenship coordinators thought that citizenship education did notengage or benefit particular groups of students more than others, over half thecoordinators and teachers interviewed reported that not all groups of studentsbenefited from or engaged with citizenship education to the same extent or inthe same way. They reported that students differed in their receptivity,readiness and ability to gain from the citizenship education on offer at theschool. The issues raised by these staff related to students’:• level of ability;• attitudes and interests.In two schools where citizenship was taught through the citizenship GCSEshort course, it was felt that students in lower ability sets were: more difficultto teach; were less able to cope with the discussion of citizenship issues whenthese did not specifically affect them; and, engaged to a lesser extent withcitizenship education, than other students. These schools were academic, and agreat emphasis was placed on GCSE targets and results. However, in a thirdschool where citizenship was also taught as a GCSE short course, the GCSEdid not appear to be a problem for lower achieving students and it was actually36

Knowledge and understandingfelt that the less able, who did not have a broad general knowledge of theissues covered, could particularly benefit from citizenship education. Indeed,lower ability students were said to prefer the more active aspects of thecitizenship programme.Students’ attitudes and interests were also mentioned as factors thatinfluenced the receptivity of students to citizenship education. In some schoolsit was felt that citizenship lessons offered students who were interested incurrent affairs, or other topics, an opportunity to find out more about thoseareas. However, it was not felt only to appeal to the engaged. In one school,citizenship education was said to provide ‘chavy’ 11 students with informationwhich they wanted to acquire but could not be seen to actively seekthemselves because of the risk of losing their ‘street credibility’ with theirpeers. In another school it was also pointed out that different topic areasinterested different students, for example, a lesson on stress management hadparticularly engaged a group of conscientious girls.Analysis of this data suggests that, given the wide range of students withineven a single school, if schools are to develop students’ knowledge andunderstanding through citizenship education then they need to provide a rangeof approaches and points of access to citizenship that match the variety ofstudents’ ability levels and interests. This may require advance discussion andconsultation with students.3.3.3 Areas where the contribution of citizenship education toknowledge and understanding can be enhancedAlthough students demonstrate a considerable sophistication of views inrelation to their own, and others’ rights and responsibilities, and acknowledgethe contribution of citizenship education to gains in their knowledge andunderstanding, there remains scope for improvement in two respects inrelation to such knowledge and understanding:• students’ understanding of decision making beyond school• students’ understanding of decision making within the school.When talking about rights and who should make decisions about their schoollife, some students demonstrated an awareness of how power is held atdifferent levels, for example, by senior managers and teachers in schools, andby government, beyond school. Indeed, some mentioned in their discussions11‘Chav’ is a derogatory slang term in popular usage throughout the UK. It refers to a subculturestereotype of a person who is uneducated, uncultured and prone to antisocial or immoralbehaviour. The label is typically, though not exclusively, applied to teenagers and young adults ofwhite working-class or lower-middle class origin. see Wikipedia [online]. Available:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chav37

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportabout rights and responsibilities, that government influenced what happened inschools, in particular via the National Curriculum, which, in turn, determinedthe approach of teachers. However, the majority of students did not mentionsuch issues, and appear to be unaware of decision making beyond school andhow this impinges on their school lives.Knowledge of decision making processes within the school itself was alsoan area where there is scope for development. For example, all the case-studyschools had school councils in place. Although groups of students interviewedhad some knowledge of how the school councils worked in their schools, therewere groups of students in some schools who were totally unaware of howtheir school council was supposed to work and of what activities studentcouncil representatives were undertaking on behalf of the student body. Thislack of knowledge and understanding is related, in part, to the restriction ofstudent voice in decision making in schools. In two schools, for example,school council activity diminished as the academic year progressed therebyimpairing the opportunities for actively learning about decision-makingprocesses within the school community. This is an issue which is covered inmore depth in the next chapter, which concerns the opportunities for activecitizenship provided by schools.This chapter has highlighted that students are well equipped to participateactively in schools and to become involved in the decision-making process.Students believe that citizenship education has contributed to their readiness toparticipate by raising their awareness and understanding of rights andresponsibilities. However, not all students have the same levels ofunderstanding of what is meant by participation. The next chapter builds onthese findings by exploring the extent of the actual opportunities that youngpeople have to participate in school and in the wider community.38

Active participation and skills of participation4. Active participation and skills ofparticipationKey findings• Within the classroom, traditional teaching and learning methods werepredominant, although there were many opportunities for students to take amore active role in their lessons through group work, research and analysis andparticipation in role-play. Generally, however students did not feel that they wereable to contribute to the planning of teaching and learning in their school.• In school, there was a range of opportunities for students to participate in, forexample, sports, fund-raising for charity and school councils. In addition,students generally had a positive attitude towards participation in school-basedactivities.• The majority of students had some opportunities to participate in decisionmakingprocesses in school. Nearly all schools provided school councils and themajority of students knew that there was a school council in their school.Students in case-study schools made their voices heard through school councilsand also opinion surveys and student focus groups.• However, students felt that student voice was permitted on some topics, but noton others. In addition, fewer than half of students had actually participated inschool council elections. The main reasons why school councils may not befunctioning well were:! lack of information;! lack of status;! giving voice to only a minority of students.• Outside of school, students participated in a range of activities such as sports,youth clubs, hobbies, raising money for charities and good causes. In a minorityof schools students also had opportunities to participate in decision-makingprocesses in the wider community.• Although the contribution of citizenship education to active participation in andbeyond school was not yet extensive, the main ways that citizenship educationhad contributed to the development of active citizenship opportunities werethrough:! provision of opportunities for active participation and input into teaching andlearning in citizenship lessons;! ‘citizenship-friendly’ school ethos facilitating active citizenship;! extra-curricular citizenship activities.• There were a range of factors which impact on opportunities for activecitizenship these include:! school culture, in relation to student consultation and volunteering;! confidence and enthusiasm of teachers and students;! attitudes and priorities of senior management and the citizenshipcoordinator;! approach to citizenship education delivery;! school size and ethos, particularly concerning academic achievement.39

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportThis chapter examines the extent to which students are able to activelyparticipate in activities in school and in the wider community. It looks at theopportunities they have for participation and the extent to which citizenshipeducation, and other factors, affect these opportunities. It concentrates onactive participation in its widest sense of opportunities that students have totake part in school and wider community life – ‘horizontal participation’. Italso considers how much students contribute, specifically, to decision- andpolicy-making processes in school and beyond – ‘vertical participation’.The chapter deals in particular with:• students’ opportunities for participation in the classroom;• students’ opportunities for participation in the school community andchallenges to student voice;• students’ opportunities for participation in the wider community;• the role of citizenship education and other factors in fostering or hinderingthe provision of opportunities for active participation in schools.4.1 Opportunities at classroom level4.1.1 Taking an active part in lessonsWithin classrooms, the Year 9 students who responded to the survey reportedthat more traditional teaching and learning methods were most frequentlyused. The majority of students said that in lessons, included those involvingcitizenship, they worked from textbooks and worksheets (89 per cent) andlistened whilst the teacher talked (87 per cent) sometimes or often. Moreactive ways of learning were also quite common, with over half of studentssaying that in their lessons they sometimes or often:• Worked in groups (69 per cent);• Researched and analysed information from different sources (56 per cent);• Participated in role-play and drama (56 per cent);• Explored, discussed and debated issues with other students (54 per cent);• Gave presentations (53 per cent).In addition, the majority of students felt that there were some opportunities toparticipate in their classrooms. More than half of students thought that thefollowing occurred in their lessons at least sometimes:• Teachers respected students’ opinions and encouraged them to expresstheir opinions in class (73 per cent);40

Active participation and skills of participation• Students felt free to express their opinions even when they were differentfrom the rest of the class (70 per cent);• Students felt free to disagree with teachers during discussions about topicalissues (69 per cent);• Students brought up issues from the news for discussion (59 per cent).Consistent with survey findings, in most case-study schools students reportedhaving some opportunities for active participation in class, such asopportunities for voicing their opinions and taking part in discussions.4.1.2 Having a voice on teaching and learningOpportunities for students to have an input into decisions about teaching andlearning appeared to be more restricted than opportunities for activeparticipation in lessons. Over three-quarters (78 per cent) of the studentssurveyed said that there was little or no involvement of students in planningteaching and learning in their school. In addition, in only two case-studyschools did students report that they had an input into teaching and learning. Inone of these schools there was a specific ‘Teaching and Learning Forum’ 12and, in the other, students felt confident about approaching teachers regardingsuch issues and reported having successfully challenged a teacher’s teachingstyle by asking the teacher to do less textbook work and more group-basedactivities in class.In general, however, students were keen to have opportunities to input intoteaching and learning and in some schools they articulated a variety ofadvantages arising from students being involved in such decision-makingprocesses. These included teachers learning about how to teach moreeffectively, with benefits for the students (who learn more) and/or the teachers(who become more competent teachers). These positive views were echoed byone teacher who had experience of receiving feedback from students as part ofthe above-mentioned Teaching and Learning Forum. This teacher thought thefeedback process was beneficial for staff: ‘If you give the students a choice inthe decisions, then they feel more engaged in what they are doing’.One group of students mentioned that allowing students an input into teachingand learning decisions was a strategy which worked particularly well withteenagers, who perceive their status to be enhanced by virtue of theirparticipation:‘I think it’s important that teachers do [try different teaching methodsin response to student feedback], because it makes us feel important12In the Teaching and Learning Forum, a select group of students give feedback to members of staffabout the teaching and learning in the school, with different subject departments being the focus ofthe feedback at different points in time.41

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportand feel a lot more involved, like they are not just reading out of a textbook … like we are on an equal par and they are not just telling uswhat to do, because that doesn’t work so well with teenagers.’4.2 Participation in the school community4.2.1 Taking an active part in school lifeIn survey and case-studies schools, there was a wide range of extra-curricularactivities available in which students could participate. As Figure 4.1 showsfor schools participating in the survey, the most commonly available activitiesin which students could participate were raising money for good causes orcharities; sports clubs or groups; arts, dance or drama groups, hobbies andgames groups, homework-related clubs and activities and school councils.However, the proportion of students involved in these activities was relativelysmall in some cases. For instance, nearly all school leaders (99 per cent) saidthat there were school or student councils available in their institutions (Figure4.1), and students were also generally aware of these opportunities, with 84per cent saying that there was a school council in their school and only eightper cent believing that there were no prospects to be involved in the running oftheir school through a council. However, Figure 4.1 also shows that there wasa large gap between the availability and take-up of school council activity. Theimplications of this are discussed further in Section 4.2.2 below.All case-study schools offered extra-curricular clubs and activities, such assports and subject-related clubs. In schools with house systems, many of theextra-curricular activities were organised in the context of (inter-)houseactivities and competitions, with some events being organised by studenthouse members. In some schools, there were opportunities for students to takeup prefect or mentoring-type roles. It is possible that some schools may beusing activities of this type to develop citizenship-related knowledge,understanding and skills.42

Active participation and skills of participationFigure 4.1 Opportunities for participation in activities in school –offered and taken up, 2005Student councilsHomeworkActivities offered by schoolsHobbies/gamesArt, drama, dance, musicSportsElecting council membersRaising money for charity0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Percentage take-up by studentsSchoolsStudentsN = 13,643 students, 81 SchoolsSource: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, Longitudinal Survey 2005Students from the survey generally had a positive attitude towardsparticipation in activities in school: two-thirds of students surveyed (66 percent) said that they enjoyed taking part in clubs and groups in school and overhalf (53 per cent) thought that doing optional activities was a good way tomeet interesting people.The students interviewed in case-study schools also recognised many reasonswhy taking part in extra-curricular activities in school was a good idea. Theseincluded gains associated with learning, getting to know other people/makingfriends, having fun, having something to do and taking advantage of suchopportunities to learn or experience different things, were often mentioned bystudents. Other reasons for getting involved, mentioned in a small number ofschools, were academic (such as getting better at a subject) and having a breakfrom lessons.The survey of Year 9 students, however, revealed that a small proportion ofrespondents (12 per cent) thought that taking part in activities in school was awaste of time. Moreover, students generally did not feel obliged to participate:the majority (59 per cent) did not think that students have a duty to take part inclubs and activities at school. These factors may partly help explain thediscrepancy between the widespread offer of extra-curricular activities across43

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportschools and the relatively low take-up of such activities by students observedin Figure 4.1.4.2.2 Having a say in school policy makingThe majority of Year 9 students surveyed felt that they had some input into thedecision-making processes in their schools. Over half (62 per cent) said thatstudents were consulted about the development of school rules and policiesand over one-fifth (21 per cent) thought that they had quite a lot, or a lot, ofsay in how the school was run.However, as reported in Figure 4.1 above, under half of the students surveyed(44 per cent) said that they had actually taken part in a school council electionand only 10 per cent had actually been involved in a school council. Whilst itis understandable that only a small proportion of students can actually sit oncouncils, the relatively small number of respondents that have voted in schoolcouncil elections, given levels of availability and awareness, suggests thatthere is still considerable work for schools to do in improving theopportunities for all students to participate in democratic processes in school.Case-study data corroborates these findings, since the students interviewedtended also to feel that they had at least some voice in school. However, theydid not necessarily have a voice across all aspects of school life. In one school,for instance, action by students had resulted in an extension of the morningbreak, but changes to the uniform were perceived to be a ‘no-go’ area.All case-study schools had a school council and students tended to identifythis structure as a way in which they could have their voice heard in theschool. In addition to the school council, many teachers and students in casestudyschools reported that opinion surveys were used to obtain students’views about issues that affected them. Other ways in which students couldhave their voices heard in case-study schools included approaching theheadteacher with any concerns. In addition, the above-mentioned ‘Teachingand Learning Forum’ 13 , which was in place in one school, was perceived bystudents to be a helpful way for students to have their voice heard.In terms of issues for consultation, in most case-study schools, staff reportedthat students were consulted about staff appointments (e.g. involvement inrecruitment interviews) as well as teaching and learning issues. In a fewschools, staff also mentioned that students had an input into:• decisions relating to the school environment and facilities;• catering in the school;13See footnote 9.44

Active participation and skills of participation• travel plans and safety;• school uniform and school rules.Other areas in which students were reported to have a voice were the schoolday, homework and fund-raising activities.Students, however, did not view staff recruitment as an area in which theyshould have their voice heard. In fact, one group of Key Stage 4 studentsthought that students should not have a voice in matters regarding staffrecruitment because the headteacher is more likely to know which candidateswould be most suitable. However, it should be noted that these studentsattended a school where Year 12 and 13 students were involved in staffappointments and as such the Key Stage 4 students who were interviewedwould not have taken part in the decisions made. This may explain why theydid not perceive students as having the ability to make a contribution in thisarea.In addition, not all students in case-study schools thought they should havemore of a voice. One group appeared satisfied with the state of affairs in theirschool. They thought that students did have a right to contribute to decisions inthe school and, in their school, students were informed via leaflets and/orconsulted via surveys or interviews. In another school, one group did not feelthat they should have more say than they had in what happened in school andhighlighted that the school itself was not free to do as it wished and had towork within the realms of the National Curriculum. The following areexamples of comments made by students who were satisfied and dissatisfiedwith student voice in their school:Students who were satisfied –example‘They usually ask everybody andthen ask the teachers and then Mr. X[headteacher] will decide whathappens’ – Key Stage 3 studentStudents who are dissatisfied –example‘At the start of the year they make abig fuss about [the school council]and then by the end nobody reallycares’ – Key Stage 4 student4.2.3 Challenges to student voiceAs discussed earlier (Section 4.2.1), there was a considerable gap betweenopportunities for school council activity and take-up of those opportunities.Evidence from the case-study schools suggests some of the main reasons whyschool councils were not functioning well included:• lack of information about school council. Students in some case-studyschools felt uninformed about what happened in school council meetings,45

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportschool council achievements, or even who their school councilrepresentative was. In some instances, representatives themselves wereunsure as to what was going on in the school or as to what follow-upaction was taken based on school council discussions. One studentrepresentative said ‘we’re never quite sure what happens, if ideas getpassed on… the sixth formers take notes and then they kind of disappear’.• lack of status of school council. In most case-study schools, schoolcouncil meetings were not as frequent as planned or desirable. In someschools, the school council representatives were not respected by otherstudents and there was a lack of interest in being a school councilrepresentative or attending meetings. In one school, where student voicewas particularly weak, one student described the situation thus:As you go up through the school, the participation in the schoolcouncil decreases. In Year 11, no-one turns up. In Year 10, two orthree people turn up but they are abused and teased for turning up…The school is good in getting you through and getting you good examresults. I don’t feel that it is supportive when it comes to the schoolcouncil.This lack of power was seen to be a reason why students failed to take theschool council seriously.• giving voice to only a minority of students. In some schools, the schoolcouncil did not represent the views of all students, but only those involvedas representatives. In addition, the coordinator in one case-study schoolcommented that she thought that only a small group of students in herschool had a voice, as they were the ones who most frequently volunteeredand were selected by the teachers to give their views. This coordinator feltthat the school may need to implement a system for tracking whichstudents have been involved in active participation so that those who donot have the opportunity for expressing their opinions can be identifiedand encouraged to do so.• underdevelopment of students’ skills of participation. School councilrepresentatives tended to be elected, but in many of the case-study schoolsstudents perceived elections to be negatively affected by students votingfor the most popular students or their friends. In one school, one studenteven suggested that input from staff in the selection of studentrepresentatives may be an appropriate way of tackling this issue, whereastwo other schools did have a system in place whereby some of the studentrepresentatives were selected by staff in order to address such issues.Concerns with voting being a ‘popularity contest’ may indicate that manystudents lack the decision-making skills necessary for the effective runningof democratic processes in school. A further area in which studentparticipation skills may be lacking is that of communication andnegotiation skills. Indeed, in two schools at least, school council meetingsdid not necessarily run smoothly, with students reportedly yelling at oneanother or fighting over the issues under discussion.46

Active participation and skills of participationThe case-study schools present a continuum concerning the opportunities forand development of student voice. While in none of the ten case-study schoolswas the functioning of the school council considered perfect, in the majority itwas working to varying degrees of effectiveness. However, in two of theschools the function of the school council was particularly poor.The following examples present two contrasting approaches to student voice.A poorly-developed student voiceDecision making in the school tends to be top-down in nature, the power of theschool council is considerably limited and it has low status, as revealed in interviewswith staff and students. One teacher interviewed suggested that there is a lack of aculture of students taking responsibility in the school. The operation of the schoolcouncil relies heavily on the input of the sixth formers who run it and varies over timedepending on how much they contribute (for example, in 2004/5 there was a dearthof council meetings). Student participation in the student council decreases as yougo up the school and student contributions are not always appropriate due tostudents lacking an understanding of school processes. Though students have beeninvolved in governors’ meetings, staff recruitment and school uniform policy, they donot receive feedback about teaching and learning, and generally feel that they donot have much of a voice in the school. While some students reported that schooluniform had been changed because of students’ views, some felt that they did nothave a voice. For instance, one student expressed the view that, despite the factthat student representatives attend governors’ meetings, ‘usually not a lot happensabout it’.A well-developed student voiceThe school’s headteacher is a champion for citizenship education, and putsparticular emphasis on the experiential and implicit teaching of citizenship. Over thepast two years, the school council has been considerably developed. Every tutorgroup elects a representative to the council. Older council representatives areinvolved in interviewing new members of staff. The students were satisfied with theoperation of the school council and, as one student noted, ‘I think it’s effectivebecause it’s not just the big issues that get changes, but the smaller issues too’. Theschool council is complemented by a student ‘Teaching and Learning Forum’ wherea select group of students, who have received training, give feedback about theteaching and learning. Students were enthusiastic about the ‘Forum’. Theyexplained: ‘loads of students have been picked to go… and talk about how thelessons are going… and talk about how to improve them’, ‘there have definitelybeen changes according to what we’ve said ’.4.3 The wider community4.3.1 Engaging with the wider communityStudents in the survey reported participation in a range of activities outside ofschool, most commonly:• Sport clubs and teams (40 per cent);• Youth clubs, scouts or guides (23 per cent);• Hobbies and games clubs (23 per cent);47

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report• Raising money for a good cause (21 per cent);• Art, dance, drama (20 per cent);• Helping in the local community (10 per cent).Furthermore, students were asked about their involvement in optionalactivities in the last 12 months. In the year prior to the survey:• Twenty-eight per cent of students had taken part in a sponsored activity;• Nearly one-fifth (18 per cent) had helped to organise or run an event;• Fifteen per cent had given any kind of help to a group or club;• Eight per cent had been part of a committee for a group or club.All case-study schools offered their students opportunities to engage with thewider community. The types of opportunities most consistently availableacross schools are described below. They include:• Fund-raising and fund-raising events for charities or charitable causes, atlocal to international level, for example: non-uniform days and fundraisingactivities for the victims of the Asian tsunami and Red Nose Day;• Volunteering in the community, including through the Duke of Edinburghprogramme;• Work experience in the community;• Visits to institutions, participation in the organisation of events wherebystudents can meet community groups different from their own, such as theelderly, younger children and individuals in hospices. In one schoolstudents were also able to interact in school and through common tuitionwith young offenders and other members of the community who weredoing vocational Entry to Employment (E2E) courses on campus.Other types of activities whereby students came into contact with the widercommunity, mentioned in only some case-study schools, includedproductions/art performances for the community (although sometimes thesewere mainly attended by parents), school trips (national and international),regional competitions in debate and public speaking, and bringing speakersfrom the community into the school (e.g. non-governmental organisations,members of parliament, local business people).Students participating in the survey had a positive attitude towardsvolunteering and it was not seen as ‘uncool’:• Nearly half (46 per cent) disagreed that their friends would laugh at peopledoing voluntary work. In contrast, only 15 per cent agreed with thisstatement;48

Active participation and skills of participation• Only 18 per cent said that most of their friends think doing voluntary workis a waste of time.Students saw advantages for themselves in doing voluntary work: 41 per centthought that it may help them get a better job in the future. Only one-fifth (19per cent) of students thought that they were too busy to take part in voluntaryactivities inside or outside school.4.3.2 Having a voice in decision making in the wider communityWhilst all case-study schools provided opportunities for students to engagewith the wider community, only a minority appeared to provide opportunitiesfor students to have a voice in decision-making processes beyond the schoolenvironment. Such opportunities, however, seemed to be very valuable as theyinvolved students being consulted on community matters, such as having aninput into local travel plans. One school was represented by school councilmembers on council and district-level youth forums.4.4 Factors affecting opportunities for active participation4.4.1 The contribution of citizenship educationThe perceived contribution of citizenship education to the creation ofopportunities for active participation within school did not appear to be,overall, very great among the teachers and students interviewed. This may bebecause the case-study schools, like schools involved in the survey (seetypology findings in Chapter 2), appeared to have concentrated on developingthe curriculum aspects of citizenship education more than the area of activeparticipation. In many case-study schools, staff felt that the active citizenshipaspects of citizenship education were in need of further development. Onlytwo of the case-study schools were classified unanimously by all staffinterviewees as progressing schools where there were opportunities for activecitizenship as well as citizenship in the curriculum. In contrast, many schoolswere considered to be focused on citizenship education in the curriculum.Nevertheless, the case-study schools highlight that the introduction ofcitizenship education may be beginning to make a recognisable contribution tothe development of opportunities for active participation in schools through:• citizenship lessons providing opportunities for active participation.Students in case-study schools reported that there were opportunities foractive participation in class in citizenship lessons. According to students,in most schools, citizenship was amongst the subjects where students havethe most opportunities for active participation in class, through discussionand voicing of opinions, alongside Religious Education (RE), PersonalSocial and Health Education (PSHE), and art and humanities subjects;49

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report• citizenship lessons providing opportunities for input into teaching andlearning. In a minority of schools, there were opportunities for an inputfrom students into teaching and learning strategies in citizenship lessons.Revision lessons, however, were also sessions where some studentsreported being allowed an input into teaching and learning;• ‘citizenship-friendly’ ethos. In some schools, the school’s seniormanagement promoted a school ethos that was citizenship-friendly (as wasthe case in the citizenship specialist school or the school where theheadteacher championed the experiential teaching of citizenshipeducation) and as such facilitated active citizenship;• extra-curricular citizenship activities. In some schools, there were extracurricularactivities or democratic processes which had clear and explicitcitizenship education objectives. In one school, a mock election had beenorganised in such as a way as to simulate the general election. The mockparties had two parallel parties that were registered for the general electionso that students could learn about their different stances, were registered tovote and were sent voting cards. In another school, the election of studentrepresentatives to the school council mimics that of MPs (from there beingan electoral register to ballot papers being put into sealed boxes). Amember of staff said: ‘it is explained that this is exactly how your parentswould do it when they go to vote’.This type of activity, however, cannot be said to be necessarily the result ofthe existence of statutory citizenship education and some of these activitiesmay already have been in place prior to September 2002, when it wasintroduced as a new National Curriculum subject. For instance, in one school,there was a long-standing residential programme for Year 7 students. Thisprogramme was perceived to have a citizenship focus and contribute tocitizenship education because it developed team-working skills given thatstudents were not able to succeed in many of the set tasks unless they workedas a team.4.4.2 The contribution of other factorsWhile citizenship education may be contributing to the provision ofopportunities for active participation in schools, other factors also appear tohave an impact on the extent to which such opportunities occur in schools.These include:• citizenship coordinators’ views and priorities;• the culture of student consultation in a school;• the culture of volunteering and charity work;• enthusiasm and competency of citizenship teachers;• school size;• student confidence;50

Active participation and skills of participation• the model of citizenship education delivery;• emphasis on academic achievement.These factors will now be considered in turn.Citizenship coordinators’ views and priorities. In some case-study schools,where the focus on citizenship education in the curriculum was perceived to bemore developed than the focus on active citizenship, the coordinators hadeither not made the latter aspect a priority or did not see it as part of their role.One of these coordinators mentioned that opportunities for participation in thelocal community were not integrated into citizenship education and that: ‘Interms of forging links with the local community with a view to doing more,that is certainly something on my personal agenda but it has joined the list ofpriorities and currently resides around number eight’. Another coordinatorthought that: ‘Links with the community… that isn’t directly part of my brief.My brief is really just the curriculum side of things’. The same coordinatorexpressed uncertainty as to what constitutes active citizenship:I never know whether you would see this [involvement by students inlocal charitable activities] as citizenship or not. Things like the bandplaying at the mayor’s party… We have the Duke of Edinburgh Award,which I suppose is a more active sort of citizenship phenomenon… it’san area we probably need to develop as a school. It’s not that itdoesn’t exist… I don’t think it’s necessarily explicit in the way thatperhaps it needs to be.Culture of student consultation. Two schools appeared to have an ethos thatwas particularly conducive to encouraging student input into teaching andlearning. Both schools appeared to be strong in the implicit aspects ofcitizenship education and were classified by staff as being a progressingschool or on the way to becoming one. In contrast, some schools appeared tohave a culture or ethos that discouraged student participation. In two of theseschools, Key Stage 3 students felt that some teachers think that they areanswering back if they voice their opinions or disagree with the teachers. OneKey Stage 4 student felt that teachers: ‘Don’t seem to recognise that we are16-year-old people. They still see us as younger and don’t really take ouropinions as much as I think they should’.One school, with a reportedly particularly ineffective school council, wasperceived by one member of staff to have a very top-down approach, withcouncil affairs controlled by the headteacher and teaching staff, while inanother school, where students felt that they should be seen but not heard,students reported an instance where, despite a feedback process beinginitiated, the outcome was negative:Classic example… We didn’t do well in our… mock exam. We gotasked to write an evaluation saying how we thought we could be taught51

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportdifferently. We put what we thought in an adult manner. We weren’tgiving them any stick or anything. And all we got back was ‘this isabsolute crap, if you think I am going to listen to any of this then youcan forget about it’.In addition, in some schools it appeared that there was not a culture ofparticipation amongst students. In some cases students felt that sometimesstudents did not respect other students’ opinions or had strong opinions and itcould seem like they are personalising issues. One group explained that attimes it happened that:If you say something… people just laugh at you. They’re like ‘oh shutup, what are you talking about?!. Yesterday I asked a question incitizenship, then a person goes to me ’you’re the cleverest kid in theclass… but sometimes you ask such stupid questions’.Culture of volunteering and charity work. One school was particularlyactive in terms of fund-raising for charity and this was a long-standing featureof life in the school in which both students and teachers took part. In anotherschool, which was a faith school with a strong ethos, students wereencouraged to become involved in fund-raising and charitable organisations,and they planned and carried out a fund-raising event as part of personal andreligious education (which encompasses citizenship education). This schoolalso had strong links with the wider community, but these tended to be withorganisations that also have a faith-based ethos.Enthusiasm and competency of citizenship teachers. In some schools, thecitizenship teachers’ approach to lessons impacted upon the extent to whichthere were opportunities for active participation. In one school, studentsreported that the core team of citizenship teachers gave more opportunities fordiscussion than other teachers, possibly due to the fact, mentioned by thecoordinator, that there were a large number of staff involved in teachingcitizenship education, but only a small core team who were dedicated andenthusiastic. In another school, students felt that there was the need for debatesto be controlled, but that not all teachers were equally skilled at runningdiscussions in lessons: ‘It depends a lot on the teacher’s skill. How much theycan control the class… because sooner or later everyone just ends up yellingat each other. You need some sort of like control over it.’In addition, whereas some teachers were positive about the capacity ofstudents to contribute constructively to discussions about school life, othersdid not believe that students had the maturity to convey their opinionsappropriately or the knowledge required to take part in certain decisionmakingprocesses.School size. The size of the school was mentioned as a factor working both forand against the provision of active participation opportunities in over half the52

Active participation and skills of participationcase-study schools. Generally, the smaller the school, in terms of studentnumbers, then the easier it was to offer participation opportunities to allstudents. In one school the question arose as to how the school could provideopportunities for all students to engage with the wider community given itslarge size.Student confidence. One citizenship coordinator reported that workexperiencestudents were often reluctant to leave the local area, because theywere used to being taken everywhere by their parents by car. The coordinatorfelt that the students lacked the confidence to get out into the community, andthat this needed working on. Furthermore, in other schools, older studentsappeared more confident in making their voice heard in school. For instance,in one school, Key Stage 4 students thought that they were more able todisagree with the teachers as they went up the school and, whereas Key Stage4 students were confident about approaching the headteacher as a way ofhaving their voice heard, Key Stage 3 students were not as confident.The model of citizenship education delivery selected by schools. Thisappeared to influence on the extent to which there was scope for the activeparticipation of students in citizenship lessons. One coordinator mentionedthat, although in both PSHE and citizenship education there was particularpotential for discussion, there was more note taking in citizenship educationthan in PSHE due to the fact that the former was an examined subject (usingthe GCSE short course) and there was the need to prepare for the exam.Emphasis on academic achievement. In one school, the citizenshipcoordinator felt that the school placed such an emphasis on maximising GCSEresults, including those on citizenship, that this was at the cost of allowingstudents to explore issues and develop their attitudes and opinions. In addition,Key Stage 4 students in some schools commented that they found it difficult tofind time to take part in opportunities for active participation in school as theywere so busy working for their GCSEs.A number of other issues also emerged from the case-study schools whichimpacted upon the extent to which students were able to participate in activecitizenship opportunities. These included:• students reported being encouraged to participate due to theencouragement of teachers and the enthusiasm of other students;• the timetable of extra-curricular activities was well advertised and theachievements of those participating was celebrated, which was positivelylooked upon by students;• some students reported not being able to take part in after-school activities,as they had no way of getting home afterwards, whereas in another schoola free bus service was provided to take students home after such activities;53

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report• teachers in some schools felt that it was difficult for students to establishrelationships with the wider community as their schools had a verydisparate intake and students often lived some distance from school;• in other schools, staff highlighted that the bureaucracy associated withtaking students into the community was a hindrance to providingopportunities for students to engage with the wider community: ‘Gettingthrough the red tape and getting around the bureaucracy is almostimpossible’;• in one school, teachers reported that there was simply not enough time totrain teachers and students in the skills needed to make the school councilrun effectively;• in a final school, which had a house system, one member of staffhighlighted that the attitude of the house manager impacted on how wellhouses were run and that therefore not all houses were equally successful.In spite of a number of reported constraints, some schools were makingsubstantial inroads in developing a culture of active participation within theirschool. The following case-study provides one such example:An active school communityThis school was deemed by staff to be developing into a progressing school andwas strong on the implicit aspects of active citizenship in the school and widercommunity. Students appeared very confident about approaching teachersregarding teaching and learning issues and even reported having successfullychallenged a teacher’s teaching style. The school has a house system as part ofwhich there are yearly elections of house leads (from amongst Year 12 students)and house assemblies and debates. Sports competitions and other activities alsorun through the house system. In addition, the school is strong on fund-raising forcharity, with teachers as well as students being involved in such activities. As onestudent noted: ‘charity is a big part of this school’. The school also has a link with aschool in Africa and organises student visits to other continents.Students thought that there were good reasons to take part in the extra-curricularactivities on offer because they enable participants to get to know other people andbecause they learn/experience different things. In addition, they mentioned thatteachers actively encourage students to participate. However, this being a highachievingschool, participation was highest in Key Stage 3 due to the timeconstraints associated with academic work in Key Stage 4.This chapter has shown that the majority of students had some opportunities toparticipate in decision-making processes in school. This was often through theschool council, though such councils were not functioning well in all schools.The chapter has also highlighted a range of factors that impact on studentopportunities for active citizenship in schools. The next chapter considersyoung people’s opportunities and experiences of active citizenship in relationto their sense of belonging to their school and wider communities.54

Community and belonging5. Community and belongingKey findings• Survey data showed that over half of students (59 per cent) felt ‘quite a lot’ or‘completely part’ of their school community. Case-study data revealed thatseveral key issues appeared to affect the extent to which young people felt asense of belonging to their school communities including:! having a say in decisions that are made in school;! relationships in the school amongst students and between teachers andstudents;! levels of student engagement;! belonging to a smaller community within the school community;! school facilities.• Although the majority of young people in case-study schools felt a greatersense of belonging to their school than to the wider community, the communityoutside of school was still important to young people. Over half (57 per cent) ofstudents responding to the survey felt ‘quite a lot’ or ‘completely part’ of theirneighbourhood.• Several key factors were highlighted by young people in the case-studyschools as impacting upon their sense of belonging to their wider communities.These included:! knowing and trusting people and having friends in the local community;! the size of the local community;! availability of activities;! feeling safe.• The majority of young people felt that it was important to be part of acommunity for two main reasons: having a sense of community providesopportunities for the development of social responsibility; and knowing peoplecreates a sense of worth, trust and security.• Many of the young people interviewed valued the concept and practice ofparticipating in a community. Whilst the school community was particularlyimportant to interviewees, many also showed a willingness to take responsibleaction in their local neighbourhoods. They valued living in communities whichwere safe and mutually trusting. This enthusiasm and sense of socialobligation provides a sound basis on which schools might develop activecitizenship opportunities within and out of school.This chapter examines the wider context in which active citizenship takesplace looking at students’ sense of belonging to their school and widercommunities.As discussed in the preceding two chapters, although young people in thecase-study schools display considerable capability to participate actively inschool life and make a positive contribution, some have a limited55

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportunderstanding of decision-making processes within and beyond school.However, there are further factors that impact upon young people’s propensityfor participation, both within and outside school. To gain a greaterunderstanding of young people’s lives and the groups and activities they findsignificant and meaningful, these factors need to be investigated further. Thefactors that facilitate and challenge students feelings of location within, anddislocation from, their school and wider communities, provide the widercontext within which the knowledge, skills and opportunities for participation,including through citizenship education, that young people gain throughschool, are situated. This chapter examines that wider context, by considering:• the circumstances in which a sense of belonging develops or is challenged,within school and the wider community;• young people’s views of community and how these impact upon theiropportunities for, and propensity to engage with, active citizenship in andbeyond school.5.1 Factors contributing to a sense of belonging in theschool communityYoung people in the case-study schools overwhelmingly felt a greater sense ofbelonging to their school than they did to their wider communities. School wasthe most important community for young people as it provided them with asafe place to make friends with people of their own age. In addition, youngpeople highlighted the fact that they spent more time in school than anywhereelse. Data from the survey reveals that, for the majority of students, the schoolcommunity was very important. Over half (59 per cent) of Year 9 students,who responded to the survey, said that they felt ‘quite a lot’ or ‘completely’part of their school.Analysis of the case-study data reveals that several key issues affect the extentto which young people feel a sense of belonging to their school communities.These include:• having a say in decisions made in school;• relationships in school amongst students and between teachers andstudents;• levels of student engagement;• belonging to a smaller community within the school community;• school facilities.Each of these issues is examined in turn in what follows.56

Community and belonging5.1.1 Having a say in decisions that are made in schoolEncouraging students to contribute to decision making was seen as animportant factor in encouraging a sense of belonging amongst teachers andsenior managers in case-study schools. One headteacher stated that in herschool ‘students can be made to feel part of the school through incorporatingthem in the decisions wherever we can’. She went on to explain that, involvingstudents in decision making allowed the development of a sense of trust andrespect between teachers and students. Meanwhile, a member of staff inanother school felt that students in her school were incorporated in decisionsthrough the active student council and this helped them to feel involved in theschool community. However, teachers and senior managers also recognisedthe limitations of student involvement in decision making. One headteacheracknowledged that students’ input only had a limited impact on the decisionstaken in school, and the coordinator of the school council in the schoolcommented that ‘children are often misguided or don’t understand the overallsituation, especially the younger ones’.The view that having a voice in school helps to create a sense of belongingwas not widely expressed by students. Some students were able to discuss theextent to which they had a voice in school by contrasting their schoolexperience to other situations in their lives. Examples included one studentwho reported a sense of relative powerlessness in her local neighbourhoodcompared to school, where she felt she had some say, and another who wasable to compare his current school experience to that of a previous school hehad attended commenting: ‘They are quite good here. At my last school theywere ruled by everything adult’. That there were few other similar commentsmay reflect the fact that young people did not consider having a voice inschool an important factor in creating a sense of belonging. However, it shouldalso be recognised that the concept of ‘voice’ is a difficult one for students toarticulate clearly. The case-study data suggests that students who had notexperienced another type of participative or non-participative community, haddifficulty gauging the extent to which the opportunities they had in schoolencouraged them to feel a sense of belonging.In some case-study schools, teachers were keenly aware of the negative impactthat not involving students in decision making had on student morale. Acitizenship coordinator in one school commented that students in her schoolhad not been consulted about changes that had been made to the disciplinepolicy and as a result the young people felt the policy was unfair and that noonein the school listened to their views.57

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report5.1.2 Relationships in school amongst students and betweenteachers and studentsFor many students in the case-study schools it was their relationship withothers, both students and teachers, that determined their sense of belonging toschool. When asked to describe their school, students often reported that theirschool was ‘friendly’. Students explained that they felt part of school becausethey spent a lot of time there and, as such, had established strong friendshipnetworks and a sense of community. One Key Stage 3 student said: ‘I spendmore time here than home, this is more my home’. Meanwhile, a Key Stage 4student stated that ‘I’ve had some of the best laughs of my life in school’,whilst another Key Stage 4 student explained how her sense of belonging toher school community had developed over time:I think I am more bonded like to the school, because we came over at11 or 12 and from being 11 or 12 we’ve grown up quite a bit, likewe’ve grown through the school and it is going to be hard to leave,because you know everybody and you’ve seen them every day for five,six, seven years.The friendship and support networks that young people in the case-studyschools have developed inside and outside school are discussed further inSection 5.2.1.Relationships with teachers were also seen as very important by students inthe case-study schools. Students in one school said that they appreciated thefact that teachers treated them as equals. A case-study school, where studentsparticularly highlighted the good relationships they had with teachers, isdescribed below.Student–teacher relationshipsA small school in a rural area had particularly positive relationships betweenstudents and teachers. Students felt that the teachers were very supportive of themand encouraged them to get involved in activities. One student commented:‘Teachers know everyone and everyone knows each other and they [teachers] areconstantly encouraging you to get involved in things, it is constantly getting better.’Another student felt that the students had good relationships with the teachers andcommented that ‘you feel like you have a nice bond with the different teachers thatteach you’. Other students noted that ‘the teachers are approachable’ and ‘theteachers can be really supportive’. There was also, as one student commented, ‘alot of respect’ amongst teachers and students. Another student explained why thiswas the case: ‘They treat you like adults, you get treated properly… because we areteenagers, if you speak to us properly, we will feel like adults’.These student views were echoed by a teacher in one of the case-studyschools, who commented that he thought it was his, and other teachers’,responsibility to foster a sense of community and belonging amongst students:58

Community and belonging‘For me and I am sure for others, it is a number one priority to make sure thatevery child knows that they matter and that they are part of it [the school]’.In addition to identifying a positive relationship between students andteachers, some students said that a factor creating a sense of belonging to theirschools was that their teachers were effective educators. One studentcommented that: ‘The school provides a good education, the teachers aregood and teach you a lot of things’. Another student said that in her school theteachers ‘actually teach you things’ and went on to explain how she valued theway the teachers encouraged students to get involved in the lessons, ratherthan just telling them what to do. Other students, when asked to describe theirschool, emphasised that a positive aspect for them was that they were good,academic schools.Conversely, a negative relationship between students and teachers was seen toinhibit the development of sense of belonging to the school communityamongst students. A teacher in one school felt that the lack of trust betweenstudents and teachers undermined efforts that had been made to involvestudents in decision making in the school. She described the student–teacherrelationship in her school as ‘very them and us’, and explained that althoughstudents were involved in voting for the head girl and head boy in the school,the students did not trust the school to take their views seriously and felt thatthe teachers would ‘just pick who they want anyway’. Evidence from surveydata shows that there were moderate levels of trust in teachers by Year 9students: over one-third (35 per cent) trusted their teachers quite a lot orcompletely; however, 15 per cent did not trust them at all. This suggests that,certainly for a minority of schools, relationships and trust between teachersand students, may be an issue of concern.5.1.3 Levels of student engagementIn some case-study schools, teachers felt that there were groups ofmarginalised students who, for various reasons, failed to feel a sense ofbelonging to the school community. Such young people included:• The socially excluded – a teacher in one school acknowledged that therewould always be some students who failed to feel part of the schoolcommunity. One teacher described these students as those ‘who arealienated from the school environment … and often alienated from schoolin general’.• The disengaged – in one case-study school, a teacher felt that a lack ofengagement with the school community was widespread: ‘A lot ofyoungsters here are just doing the schooling bit because they have to’. Hefelt that this was because identifying with the school was seen as ‘uncool’and as such only a minority of students tried to be part of the school59

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportcommunity. A teacher in another case-study school described such youngpeople as those who were ‘quite selfish in their world view’.• Low achievers – one citizenship coordinator in a school felt that thestudents who were less academically able, and who were as such ‘at thebottom of the class’, felt marginalised from the school community.Whilst a failure to feel sense of belonging to the school community may beattributed, in some cases, to the attitudes and values of certain groups of youngpeople, such as the consciously disengaged, in other cases, it would seem thatschools themselves need to carry some responsibility for the feelings ofalienation experienced by low achieving, socially excluded or otherwisedisadvantaged young people.5.1.4 Belonging to a smaller community within the schoolcommunityTeachers and senior managers, particularly in larger case-study schools,believed that students in their schools felt a sense of belonging because theywere part of smaller communities within the school, such as a form group,which they were often taught in for many subjects, or a house. In schoolswhere there were house systems, teachers emphasised the important role thatthese systems played in creating a sense of belonging, as they providedstudents with smaller communities in which they could more easily participateand feel part of. A Key Stage 4 student in one school commented that gettinginvolved in house activities encouraged a sense of belonging that crossed otherschool divisions, of age and year group: ‘there is a sense of a united front,especially in house entertainment, independent of how old you are’.Schools where interviewees highlighted that the house system had improvedstudents’ sense of belonging were those where there were inter-housecompetitions for other activities as well as sports, such as raising money forcharity, arts and drama. Students in one school commented that therelationship between the different houses was one of ‘extreme rivalry’ and ateacher in this school also commented that there was a lot of competitionbetween the houses, indicating that the sense of belonging was more to housethan to the school as a whole. 14 This point is illustrated in the example below.The role of house systems in creating a sense of belongingA particularly large school had successfully used a house system to create a senseof belonging in the school and encourage participation in the school community.A teacher from the school explained that it was difficult for students to feel a senseof belonging to the school as a whole, as it was so big ‘five hundred students ineach year group means a sense of community amongst year groups is impossible’.14It is worth noting that none of those interviewed observed that there were negative aspects to acompetitive atmosphere between houses.60

Community and belongingIn addition, a senior manager commented that the house system in her school had‘basically broken down a very large school into six smaller communities that thestudents can identify with’. The houses, as well as running sports competitions, rannon-sports activities such as Christmas decoration competitions and pantomimes.A senior manager in the school emphasised that students had a say in the activitiesthey undertook within their houses and that this was important in fostering a senseof belonging. The citizenship coordinator also felt that students had a sense ofbelonging to their houses. However, she was unsure of the extent to which studentsfelt a sense of belonging to the school as a whole.However, efforts to encourage a sense of belonging to smaller units within thecase-study schools were not always successful. In one school the headteacherdid not support the development of a house system, so although there wereplans to introduce such a system, progress was very slow. In another school ateacher had tried to encourage a sense of belonging amongst year groupsthrough year group focused activities. This was thwarted because otherteachers in the school were too busy to organise activities, and as a result theydid not take place.5.1.5 School facilitiesThe quality of the school building and the facilities that were available tostudents were seen as important factors in encouraging a sense of community.Students in one school said that they liked the fact that the school had goodsports and computer facilities as it meant that there were a range of things forthem to do. The impact on community spirit in a school, which had recentlyhad a lot of work on the school building completed, is described below.School building and facilitiesThis school had recently had a lot of building work done including new IT, sports andcanteen facilities. The headteacher believed that the new buildings and facilities had‘boosted the school’s self-esteem’. He felt that the students in the school ‘look tothe material things to judge the school and see it in a positive light now as they’vehad all this work done’. Students were also positive about the new buildings andfacilities. They were proud of the facilities that the school had, and many had chosento attend this school over others partly because of the good facilities. One studentdescribed his viewpoint: ‘I saw other schools before I came. When I came here Ireally liked the teachers and the facilities, I was really impressed by them. I’vedefinitely made the right choice.’Students also enjoyed using the new facilities, and particularly cited being able touse laptop computers and interactive whiteboards as highlights of lessons they hadhad recently. They described the new ICT classrooms as ‘much better than a stuffyold classroom’. In addition, students felt that the new facilities improved their qualityof life at school: ‘With the new canteen it gives you somewhere to relax, like if youare somewhere where it doesn’t look nice, you can’t relax, but if you are somewherewhich is really nice then you can sort of relax better’.61

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportStudents in another school felt negatively about the school because of thecondition of the building. When asked to describe what their school was like,some Key Stage 4 students described it as ‘a dump’ and ‘boring and dirty’.Key Stage 3 students expressed similar sentiments but were less harsh in theirdescriptions of it as ‘not a perfect school’, ‘a bit scrubby, with graffiti’ and‘a bit run down’.There was also a range of additional issues that teachers and students thoughthelped foster a sense of belonging and community within the case-studyschools. These included:• Relative safety and stability of school life – one teacher commented thatmany students had disjointed lives outside of school, and that for thesestudents the stability of school made them feel safe and part of somethingcontinuous. Students in some schools commented that they did not feelsafe in their local communities, and that their schools provided a safehaven where they could meet up with friends.• Sharing of fundamental values – teachers from the two faith case-studyschools commented that the religious aspect of their schools helped tofoster a sense of belonging. One teacher felt this was due to regularcollective acts of worship that took place in the school. Another teacherfelt that students and teachers shared the same fundamental values in theschool and that this helped encourage a sense of belonging, which wasreinforced though the religious practices in the school, even though not allstudents and teachers shared the same religious beliefs.• External factors – one school was located in the centre of the localcommunity, and many of the students’ grandparents and parents hadattended the school. As such this school had a strong sense of communityand belonging linked to the wider community. A school in another areahad a very large number of feeder primary schools, and this produced adisparate student body. Senior managers and teachers felt that because ofthis they had to work harder than other schools to engender a sense ofcommunity within the school.The next section considers the circumstances that enable, or hinder students’sense of belonging to the wider community.5.2 In what circumstances does a sense of belonging to thewider community develop?As discussed in the previous section, the majority of young people in casestudyschools felt a greater sense of belonging to their schools than to theirwider communities. Evidence from the survey data, however, suggests that thewider community is still important to young people. A total of 57 per cent ofYear 9 students surveyed felt ‘quite a lot’ or ‘completely’ part of theirneighbourhood. Young people in the case-study schools identified key factors62

Community and belongingimportant in helping them to develop a sense of belonging to their widercommunities. These included:• knowing and trusting people and having friends in the local community;• the size of the local community;• availability of activities;• feeling safe.These different factors are examined, in turn, below.5.2.1 Knowing and trusting people and having friends in the localcommunityA key factor identified by many young people from the case-study schools, inencouraging their sense of belonging to their wider communities, wasknowing people in their neighbourhoods. Evidence from the surveys revealsthat whilst the majority of Year 9 students do know people in their localcommunities, these are generally their parents’ friends rather than family.Over half (60 per cent) of young people said that their parents had lots offriends in the local community, whilst 64 per cent said that they did not livenear most of their relatives. For some of the younger participants from thecase-study schools, having people of their own age to play with, locally, wasimportant. For example, one Key Stage 3 student noted that although someparts of her community were ‘rough’, in ‘some streets and cul-de-sacs thereare children around you can play with’.For older participants, having their friends nearby was also important. As oneKey Stage 4 student commented: ‘All my friends live nearby and there areyounger people down the road’. Other students commented that their parentsalso had a wide social circle in their neighbourhoods, which contributed to asense of belonging. One Key Stage 3 student felt that they could not imagineliving anywhere else because ‘everyone knows each other, it is full of youngpeople and my parents and I know most people who live nearby’, whilstanother commented: ‘My Mum knows practically everyone in the area, as wewalk along she says “hello, hello” to everyone’.Trust between members of the local community, particularly between parentsand other adults, was also seen as important. Over two-fifths (41 per cent) ofYear 9 students from the survey reported that where they lived, theirneighbours looked out for each other. One Key Stage 3 student, from the casestudyschools described such a situation in his area: ‘if you go on yourholidays, you can rely on your neighbours to look after your pets. I have atleast four people around us that we can ask’. Other students generally thoughtthat there was a sense of trust amongst their neighbours, with one studentcommenting: ‘People leave their doors open where I live’, whilst another said63

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportthat ‘people who live there [in her local community] trust each other’. Otherstudents commented that they themselves were trusted by other people in theirlocal communities. One respondent said: ‘I think people where I live trust meto help them out in their garden’.The example below provides an illustration of one case-study school wherestudents expressed a strong sense of belonging to the local community:A sense of communityIn a school situated in a small village, surrounded by other villages, students at theschool reported a particularly strong sense of local community. Many people in thelocal community had lived there for many years and knew one another and therewas a sense of trust amongst neighbours. A Key Stage 3 student stated that ‘MyMum knows most people: she has lived in the village all her life and she is nearly40’. Another Key Stage 3 student commented that ‘most people respect each other’,while another said that ‘if we go on holiday we will leave our key with the next doorneighbour in case anything happens’. A Key Stage 4 student explained his feeling ofattachment to his local community: ‘I’m right bonded to my village, I’d prefer to livethere rather than anywhere else because like I’ve been brought up there’. Inaddition, many students said that they had friends locally. As most students livedlocally, their friendship networks in school and out of school were closely interlinked.One student said ‘everyone that you hang about with in school hangs about in thevillage too, or we all get the bus down to the other village’.Although the majority of young people interviewed in the case-study schoolsagreed that living in a close-knit community was an advantage, there werethose that saw it less positively. One student described how her localcommunity could sometimes feel claustrophobic:Everyone goes to the same places and everyone knows each other.Everyone is into each other’s business. Sometimes you just needsomewhere you can get away from everyone and the rivalry.Neither was it the case that all students came from close-knit communities.Almost half (47 per cent) of students in the survey reported that they trustedtheir neighbours only a little or not at all. In addition, some young people inthe case-study schools felt isolated from their local neighbourhoods. Feelingmuch younger than the rest of the local population was an isolating factor forsome interviewees, and one student described the sentiments of many otherswhen she said that where she lived was ‘full of old people’. Students in someareas felt that people in their communities did not really talk to each other.One Key Stage 4 student described how, in his neighbourhood, ‘nobody everleaves the house apart from in a car to go somewhere else’. Another KeyStage 4 student described how the sense of isolation in his community hadincreased:We don’t know many people in our road … and I just think that isbecause everything has changed, it used to be that everyone was64

Community and belongingfriends and everyone knew everyone else, but now I think that peopleare more wary of each other and people are more private as well.Some young people who did not have friends locally also felt a sense ofisolation from their neighbourhoods. One student explained that ‘none of myfriends live in my village, it seems quite cliquey’. Some young people said thatthey felt different from the people who lived in their local communities: onestudent said this was because ‘I don’t fit in. Don’t know people’, whilstanother said that this was because his neighbours were ‘all Chavs’ 15 . Anotherstudent expressed the view of many in this situation, when she said: ‘I’d ratherbe closer to my friends’. Some students also felt that people of their age werenot trusted by members of their local community. One commented that‘everyone is old in my street. Me and my brother are the only young people soeveryone is like “oh, watch out for them”’. This perceived sense of distrust ofyoung people in local communities was a major issue for students interviewedin the case-study schools. It is explored further below.15See footnote 8 for a definition of the term ‘Chav’.65

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportYoung people in the community – students’ viewsMany young people in the case-study schools felt that they were not trusted in their localcommunities, as illustrated by the following quotations:‘Adults mistrust kids.'‘I don’t think they trust teenagers of our age.’‘Anything that goes wrong is blamed on young people.’‘It is a sweeping generalisation of teenagers as a whole, everyone thinks we are goingto be stealing stuff.’In fact, many students had experienced being treated suspiciously by adults:‘Sometimes people will cross the road as you are walking down the street.’‘I hate that when you go in a shop and they really keep their eye on you and you feel quiteintimidated because you are being treated like a criminal.’‘Sometimes if you go to the park to play in the swings and adults are there with little kids, theywill leave and you know it is because you’ve turned up.’‘When we are out on the streets playing football people assume you are up to no good.Sometimes they call the police.’Some young people felt that they were treated suspiciously because of their choice of clothes:‘Sometimes I get watched just because of the clothes I wear, not just because of my age.’‘This whole thing about if you wear a hoodie you are going to nick things. I wear hoodies all thetime and I don’t nick things.’Young people felt that sometimes they were unfairly treated in public spaces because they metup in groups:‘There is a stereotype round here that kids who hang about outside shops are Chavs and they’llmug you for all your money … the reason they hang around is that there is nowhere else to go.’‘We don’t want to feel as though we are intimidating other people, but we still want to be withour friends.’For students in two case-study schools their movements in public spaces were further restrictedby the law. Young people in one area had experienced being moved on by police under Section30 of the Anti Social Behaviour Act (GB. Statutes, 2003). Whilst young people in anotherschool said that there were curfews in operation in some of their neighbourhoods.In 5.2.2 spite of The these size frustrations, of the young local people community did understand why they were sometimes treatedwith Living suspicion, in a however: small community ‘it’s fair enough was seen things to do encourage get nicked’. Some a sense students of belonging also said that andthey knew people who had stolen things. In addition one interviewee commented ‘Sometimes Icommunity by young people interviewed in case-study schools. One studentdon’t trust people my own age because some people my age make trouble’. Survey evidenceshows, explained: however, ‘If that you this live was in the a view small of a minority: community, over half like of a Year cul-de-sac, 9 students (59 you per talk cent) totrusted people people more of and their own you age trust quite people a lot or more’. a great Another deal. In addition, student many commented case-study that students howprotested friendly that a local it was community only a minority was, of young depended people who on the behaved size: badly, ‘it depends and that how it was big unfair thefor community all young people is … to I be live tarnished in a little with the village, same reputation: I wouldn’t say everyone lives in eachothers’ ‘We pockets, all get named but we like do, yobbos, so it asbos is pretty … but I friendly’. think it is just Students certain individuals mostly thoughtthat there were benefits who to living think they in are a small cool doing community it.’ as neighbours weresupportive ‘Chavs, of I each am anti other them and because young they people are the ones felt they that cause knew trouble what and was that, going on.One student commented and then that everyone in a close-knit else gets into community trouble for it.’ ‘people‘Wherever you go there are always a few who cause problemsand give the rest of us a bad name.’66

Community and belonging5.2.2 The size of the local communityLiving in a small community was seen to encourage a sense of belonging andcommunity by young people interviewed in case-study schools. One studentexplained: ‘If you live in a small community, like a cul-de-sac, you talk topeople more and you trust people more’. Another student commented that howfriendly a local community was, depended on the size: ‘it depends how big thecommunity is … I live in a little village, I wouldn’t say everyone lives in eachothers’ pockets but we do, so it is pretty friendly’. Students mostly thought thatthere were benefits to living in a small community as neighbours weresupportive of each other and young people felt they knew what was going on.One student commented that in a close-knit community ‘people look out foreach other, like if they see someone in trouble they can stop and help’.Another student said: ‘It is good because if there are things going on you canfind out about them’.Some students did comment however, that the main disadvantage of living in asmall community was that their parents were ‘always stopping off to talk’, and,as outlined in Section 5.2.1 above, that it could be difficult to find personalspace or privacy. Additionally, as outlined in Section 5.2.3 below, youngpeople living in small communities often complained of the lack of facilities,activities and events in which they could participate. Furthermore, in two casestudyschools where students were able to access nearby large towns and citiesby public transport, some young people felt that there were more facilities andactivities for people of their age to participate in.5.2.3 Availability of activitiesIndeed, being able to participate in activities in the local community was animportant factor for some young people in the case-study schools, as itenabled them to meet other people in the locality. One student commented that‘I dance most weeks, so I know a lot of people through that, but there are somepeople in the village who I don’t know’. Another student explained that,having recently moved to a new area, his family would soon get to know otherpeople through community activities: ‘Even though I don’t know anyone there,there is a school and picnics and a beach and barbeques, so I will soon get toknow people there’. However, only a minority of young people interviewed inthe case-study schools felt that they had the opportunity to participate in theirlocal communities. Most young people felt that there was a lack of facilitiesand opportunities for people of their age group in their local neighbourhoods.Furthermore, half of the students (50 per cent) who responded to the surveydid not think that there were lots of activities in their neighbourhood in whichthey could actively participate. The experiences of the case-study students areexamined in more detail in the box below.67

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportCommunity facilities – young people’s perspectivesMany of the young people interviewed in the case-study schools felt that there werelimited facilities in their local areas. They explained that in their communities:‘[There are] just five shops and a newsagents’‘[There is] a Post Office and that is about it.’‘[There are] just houses and one football pitch.’‘There used to be a park but they built houses on it.’‘There is nothing to do.’‘It is a nice place, just boring. Nothing goes on.’They also explained limitations which were put on their use of public spaces:‘If we are sitting on the top field at night you get moved on. The police ask you tomove on. Used to go to the youth club, but it is shut for refurbishment,so there is nowhere to go.’‘There are loads of fields and if you try to play football on those, someone comes upand shouts at you.’This dearth of local facilities for young people, and their exclusion from public spaces,was not only frustrating for young people but inhibited their sense of belonging totheir local communities:‘[I] know people in local communities but there is nothing to do – no way [I] can takepart in the local community and feel part of it.’‘I don’t feel like old enough to really feel part of our community. I don’t know why. It’sjust there aren’t many opportunities.’Young people’s alienation from their local community in some areas resulted inantisocial and illegal behaviour:‘Because of boredom a lot of people go out and vandalise and drink.’5.2.4 Feeling safeFeeling safe in their local communities was an important issue for youngpeople interviewed in the case-study schools. Whilst many students said thatthey felt safe where they lived, there were a proportion that did not. Someyoung people described their neighbourhoods as ‘rough’. ‘Because there arebrothels, people break the windows and you can get robbed’ and ‘because ofmuggings, drug dealers and murders’. Some young people felt under threat intheir local communities, either from verbal or physical abuse. One student saidthat in his local community ‘some people are not very nice and they pick onyou’ whilst another said that ‘I won’t go out of the house on my own’. Someyoung people were scared of other groups of young people in theircommunities.68

Community and belongingAlso one Key Stage 4 student said:In my village there are two types of young people, the people who wearall black and are scary and the people who wear Burberry and try tobeat you up.Another Key Stage 4 student said that where he lived: ‘If you walk pastAlldays at 9 o’clock then you are really scared. The Chavs 16 are threatening toput a hammer to you’. One young person interviewed described an experienceof physical assault in her local community and said that she had had thingsthrown at her windows because she was ‘a Goth’ 17 . In such situations, it wouldseem all the more important that schools do all they can to engender a sense ofbelonging and community within the school.The final section of this chapter examines the extent to which young peoplevalue being part of a community and why this is important to them.5.3 Why is community important to young people?The majority of young people felt that it was important to be part of acommunity, for two main reasons:• a sense of community provides opportunities for the development of socialresponsibility;• knowing people creates a sense of worth, trust and security.For many of the young people in the case-study schools, a sense of communitywas important because they felt a social responsibility to contribute to thewell-being of their neighbourhoods. Young people in the case-study schoolswere often frustrated that there were groups of young people in their localcommunities who did not make an effort to do this. Several intervieweescommented that young people ‘should [look after the local community] but,they don’t’. One Key Stage 3 student said about her town: ‘We’ve just hadregeneration …[people should] stop dropping litter and spitting, and droppingfags on the floor’. A student in another area commented: ‘In some placeswhere you go in the town there is a lot of graffiti and places where peoplearen’t respectful’. One young person accepted the inevitability of this kind of1617See the footnote 8 for a definition of the term ‘Chav’Goth is a modern subculture that first became popular during the early 1980s within the gothicrock scene, a sub-genre of post punk. It is associated with gothic tastes in music and clothing.Styles of dress range from gothic horror, punk, Victorian, fetish, cybergoth, androgyny, and/or lotsof black. Since the mid-1990s, styles of music that can be heard in goth venues range from gothicrock, industrial, punk, metal, techno, 1980s’ dance music, and several others. See Wikipedia[online]. Available: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goth69

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportbehaviour, however: ‘There is one group who do a lot of vandalism … you willalways have people who don’t [look after the local community]’.Knowing and trusting people in their local communities clearly also created asense of worth, trust and security for young people in the case-studyschools. One student commented: ‘You know people and people help eachother’, and another said: ‘If you are in a community, everyone knows eachother and trusts each other and you feel more safe’. Other studentscommented: ‘It would be weird not having a community…because you’d justfeel all alone’ and: ‘If you didn’t have a community you’d be pretty bored sobeing part of a community is important.’Many of the young people interviewed clearly valued both the concept andpractice of participating in a community, whether inside or outside of school.Belonging to a community was generally regarded as an important aspect oflife, with the school community being regarded as particularly influential.These young people had spent much of their lives in school and, consequently,had built up valuable friendship and support networks there. Many alsoshowed a willingness to take responsible action in their local neighbourhoodsto make them better and safer places to live. They valued living incommunities where they trusted others, believed they were trusted in return,and felt safe and secure. This enthusiasm and sense of social obligation,provides a sound basis upon which schools might develop opportunities foractive citizenship, both within the school community and through links withthe wider community.This chapter has reported some of the things that young people interviewed inthe case-study schools valued about their local communities: such as, living ina close-knit community and knowing friends and neighbours nearby, feelingsafe and having opportunities to participate in the community. It has alsohighlighted the sense of alienation that some young people feel from theirlocal communities due to a lack of facilities and opportunities for people oftheir age and the restrictions placed on their movements in public spaces bylegal and social regulations. The next and final chapter of this report buildsupon young people’s views about community and belonging. It considers thechallenges to the development of active citizenship in and beyond schools.It discusses possible ways of taking citizenship education forward in order tostrengthen the opportunities and experiences of active citizenship that areavailable for all young people and, in so doing, make a telling contribution towider policy initiatives such as Every Child Matters: Change for Childrenprogramme..70

Moving active citizenship forward6. Moving active citizenship forwardHaving analysed the range of factors and processes which underpin students’engagement with, or disengagement from, active citizenship opportunities andexperiences, this final chapter revisits and attempts to provide answers to thequestions outlined in the introduction, namely:• What is the potential for citizenship education, as an active practice, (a) totake place and (b) to contribute to the Change for Children programme andcivil renewal action plan?• How far is this potential currently recognised and realised in practice?• What actions need to be taken in order for this potential to become betterrecognised and realised in practice in the present and future:! by policy-makers at national and local level?! by representatives in the wider community?! by leaders, coordinators and teachers in schools?! by young people?Through the process of answering these questions the chapter:• draws some conclusions about the current state of citizenship education, asan active practice, in schools and the readiness of citizenship practice tocontribute to the Every Child Matters programme and civil renewalagendas;• summarises some of the key challenges to the promotion of activecitizenship (i.e. of citizenship as an active practice):! in schools, in both the curriculum and whole school culture;! in communities, through links with schools;! for policy-makers at national and local level; and! for young people.• in response to these challenges, sets out some possible ways forward,particularly in relation to the school context, in order to ensure thedevelopment of meaningful participation opportunities and experiencesfor all young people.71

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report6.1 What is the potential for citizenship education, as anactive practice (a) to take place and (b) to contribute tothe Change for Children programme action plan?The findings from this report highlight the considerable potential forcitizenship education as an active practice, (a) to take place, especially inschools, with links to wider communities, and (b) to contribute to the Changefor Children programme action plan. Indeed, the evidence from the case-studyschools suggests that a number of the key underlying factors, which foster andsustain active citizenship, were already evident to, and supported by, youngpeople in their daily lives in and beyond school. These factors include:• Sense of community and belonging – young people valued the concept ofcommunity and welcome the sense of belonging that being part of acommunity can bring. They want to be part of strong, safe communitiesthat are based on networks and friendships that foster trust, concern forindividual well-being, a sense of self-worth and that encourage individualand collective social responsibility.• Attachment to the school community – the majority of young peopleviewed school as the main social and participative community in theirlives. This is because of the amount of time they spend there and thefriendships they make and networks they join. They saw school asproviding a social and participative experience as much as an educationalone. They came to school to make friendships and participate in socialnetworks as well as to learn.• Attachment to wider communities – though wider communities,particularly the local community, were not the major community in whichyoung people participate (as noted above that is the school) young peoplestill valued being part of this wider community. They care about whathappens in the wider community and value being part of family andneighbourhood networks, where these are present.• Having a voice – young people believe that they should have a voice onmatters that affect them, especially in school. Most were measured in thisview, feeling that others, in particular headteachers and teachers, and to alesser extent, parents, governors and the government, also have a right to avoice. Most young people said that whilst it might not always beappropriate for them to have the final say, they value being involved indecision making and want to be consulted about issues that affect them.They were keen to show that they can use their voice, both individuallyand collectively, in a responsible manner.• Making a contribution – most young people were keen to make an activeand responsible contribution to the communities to which they belong,particularly the school community. Many students, particularly older ones,felt that they should take responsibility for themselves, their schools andtheir peers. They demonstrated considerable sophistication in their viewsof the need for a balance between the granting of rights and exercise of72

Moving active citizenship forwardresponsibilities. However, they also revealed a clearer awareness of theirrights than of their responsibilities.• Linking opportunities and experiences – young people make linksbetween their opportunities and experiences of active citizenship indifferent contexts. They were able to compare and contrast theirexperiences between as well as within schools, and between school andtheir local community. They were sensitive to change in their opportunitiesand experiences of active citizenship, in these different contexts.These factors are reinforced through educational policy and legal statute,notably:• Statutory citizenship education in schools – schools have a legal duty toensure that all young people receive their statutory entitlement tocitizenship education. The aims and processes of the new subject, asdetailed in the curriculum Order, afford considerable potential for thedevelopment of citizenship as an active practice. Most students have thecapacity to and show an interest in taking part and making a contributionthrough citizenship education, as an active practice, in their schools.• New statutory frameworks for the inspection of schools and ofchildren’s services – these new frameworks encourage schools and thosein charge of children’s services at a local level to ensure that children andyoung people have a voice, feel safe, secure and valued and are involvedin making a positive contribution, in partnership with others. They alsoactively involve children and young people in the actual review andinspection process in schools and local communities. The frameworkssupport the change for children programme action plan.It is one thing for citizenship education, as an active practice, to have thepotential (a) to take place and (b) to contribute to the change for childrenprogramme action plan, but quite another for that potential to be recognisedand realised in practice.6.2 How far is the potential for citizenship education, as anactive practice, (a) to take place and (b) to contribute tothe Change for Children programme action planrecognised and realised in practice?Despite the existence of supportive student attitudes and legislativeframeworks the evidence from the survey data and case-study schools suggeststhat the potential for citizenship education, as an active practice, to take placewas only partially being realised at present. The evidence confirms thatalthough young people currently had opportunities and experiences of activecitizenship, in general, these:73

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report• were largely confined to the school context;• comprised largely ‘horizontal’ rather than ‘vertical’ participation andengagement. 18 They concerned opportunities to take part rather thanopportunities to affect real change by engaging with the decision-makingprocess;• did not often connect opportunities and experiences in the curriculum withthose in the whole school;• often only involved certain groups of students rather than all students,despite an invitation for all students to participate;• did not link to wider contexts and communities beyond school.The case-study school experiences also highlight the variation in thecontribution of citizenship, as a national curriculum subject, to young people’sopportunities and experiences of active citizenship. While there was evidenceof considerable efforts underway in some schools to make the contributionreal and meaningful for students, this was not the case in all schools. Theseefforts must be seen against the backdrop of the focus in schools on ensuringthat the delivery of citizenship education, as a subject in the curriculum, isunder control. There were signs in the survey data and case-study schools ofincreased familiarity with, and confidence in, delivering the citizenshipcurriculum in 2005 compared with two years previously. This focus wasinfluenced, in part, by the standards agenda drive to improve the quality ofteaching and learning and students’ academic achievement. However, thisdelivery focus has meant that in some schools the citizenship curriculum hasbecome divorced from the notion of citizenship as an active practice with linksto the school culture and wider communities beyond school.The impact of this curriculum focus was evident in the key challenges forcitizenship education, as identified by school leaders and teachers in the 2005survey data (See Section 2.8, Figure 2.10). Interestingly, the leadingchallenges were precisely those arising from curriculum delivery, namelypressure on time, assessment, status of the subject and teachers’ subjectexpertise. Tellingly, engaging students, links with the local community andstudent participation in the school, the elements of citizenship as an activeprocess in and beyond school, were identified as lesser challenges.The current situation concerning the development of active citizenshipopportunities and experiences for young people in schools is perhaps notsurprising for a number of reasons arising both in this and other reports from18There is a distinction in the literature on active citizenship and civil renewal between ‘horizontalparticipation’ and ‘vertical participation’ (Jochum et al., 2005). Horizontal participation relates toparticipation in community activities, charities, sports clubs, associations and is less formal.Vertical participation, meanwhile, relates to participation in political affairs, includingparticipation in political processes and governance related to the decision-making processes ininstitutions and society.74

Moving active citizenship forwardthe study (Kerr et al., 2003 and 2004; Kerr and Cleaver, 2004; Cleaver et al.,2005).• Timeframe – citizenship education only became statutory in schools in2002 and therefore policy and practice are still emergent and not fullyformed. There is still the opportunity for the development of activecitizenship opportunities and experiences in school.• Competing agendas and priorities – citizenship education is competingfor space, status and resources in schools alongside other agendas andpriorities, particularly those concerning the raising of standards andstudent achievement through improved examination results.• Active citizenship not made explicit – citizenship education wasintroduced as a national curriculum subject into the school curriculum,with little explicit reference, in the supporting documentation andresources, to the need to develop citizenship as an active practice in thecurriculum with links to whole school and the wider community beyond.• Challenge and complexity of the active citizenship change process –the democratic change process at the root of active citizenship ischallenging and complex, both to understand and effect. At its core itaddresses the nature of the power relationship between young people andadults in society. It is particularly challenging to schools given the size ofstudent populations and variety of students in a school.• Leadership and coordination – the proposed, multi-agency, partnershipapproach to active citizenship, both in schools and communities, ischallenging. It benefits from clear leadership and coordination. Suchleadership and coordination can be difficult to manage effectively withinschools.• Limited time to train staff and build confidence – despite increasedtraining opportunities there remains a lack of teachers in schools withsufficient subject expertise and confidence to lead and contribute toteaching and learning in citizenship education. It will take time forteachers and students to feel confident about their involvement withcitizenship as an active practice.• Limited time and resources – time and resources are valuable and limitedcommodities in schools. There is considerable pressure on findingcurriculum time and resources to deliver citizenship adequately in thecurriculum. The democratic change process at the heart of activecitizenship is time and resource intensive and requires constantmaintenance.These reasons give rise to a number of challenges, particularly for schools, ifcurrent citizenship education practice is to evolve in ways that provideopportunities and experiences of active citizenship for all young people in thefuture. These challenges are explored in the next section.75

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report6.3 What are the key challenges and ways forward for activecitizenship in the present and future?Many of the ways forward for active citizenship were highlighted in thepreceding chapters of this report. These chapters raised a number of keychallenges for those audiences central to the promotion of active citizenship,notably:• school leaders;• citizenship coordinators;• teachers;• representatives of the wider community;• policy-makers at national and local level; and• young people.The key challenges for each of these audiences are explored, in turn, in whatfollows.There is a particular focus on the key challenges facing those in schools.Developing practice in the case-study schools is used cumulatively to suggestfour practical measures that schools can take in order to enhance students’active citizenship opportunities and experiences in schools. These measureswere present in the case-study schools that were most successful in providingstudents with active citizenship opportunities. This focus is highly relevantgiven that school is viewed by students as their main social and participativecommunity, and offers the location with the greatest potential to provideyoung people with opportunities and experiences of citizenship as an activepractice. This section of the report provides suggestions for thought for schoolleaders, citizenship coordinators, teachers and young people, as well as policymakers.6.3.2 Key challenges and ways forward for all audiencesThere are a number of key challenges and ways forward, concerning thedevelopment of active citizenship, that apply to all the audiences involved inthe process in schools and beyond. They include the challenge and need to:• work in partnership to boost the capacity for the development of activecitizenship in a range of contexts and to increase the capabilities ofindividuals and organisations to take such development forward withconfidence;76

Moving active citizenship forward• recognise and build on the underlying, supportive attitudes of youngpeople and legislative and policy initiatives that promote citizenship as anactive practice;• embrace the process of change that is at the heart of active citizenship anddemands a transformation in the power relationship between young peopleand adults at all levels of society, and encourage its adoption andpromotion;• acknowledge and raise awareness of the short and long-term benefits ofproviding meaningful opportunities and experiences of active citizenshipfor young people, for schools, communities and society at large;• ensure that all students, and not just a majority, have access to and take upopportunities and experiences of active citizenship;• ensure that active citizenship opportunities provide experiences not just of‘horizontal’ but also of ‘vertical’ participation, experiences of both takingpart and attempting to effect change;• provide sufficient training and development, particularly for teachers andschool leaders, in order to boost the capacity, capabilities and confidenceof individuals and organisations to develop and take forward citizenship asan active practice;• recognise and promote the central role of schools, and the particularcontribution of citizenship as a curriculum subject, in laying thefoundations for active citizenship for children and young people.These are the core challenges, arising from the survey data and case-studyschools, in taking active citizenship forward. How they are approached andplayed out in practice, in terms of priority and emphases, will varyconsiderably depending on audience and context.6.3.3 Key challenges and ways forward for those in schools(school leaders, citizenship coordinators and teachers)The cumulative practice from the case-study schools identifies four measuresthat were important in enhancing the active citizenship opportunities andexperiences for young people in those schools. These four measures suggestthat, in order to lay secure foundations for citizenship as an active practicewithin the curriculum, with links to the whole school and wider communitybeyond, schools should consider the importance of ensuring that they:a. build and maintain a strong sense of belonging to the school community(with links to belonging to the local community);b. develop an ongoing, active focus in the delivery of citizenship education;c. assist students to participate in decision-making processes in school andbeyond, on a regular basis;77

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportd. provide sufficient training and development in relation to activecitizenship for teachers and students.a) Build and maintain a strong sense of belonging to the schoolcommunity (with links to belonging to the local community)The case-study data identified a number of measures that schools were takingto develop a sense of belonging for young people within the schoolcommunity and, ultimately, the wider community. Building a strong sense ofcommunity established a positive climate for the development of activecitizenship opportunities and practice. These measures included:• giving young people a voice through formal school mechanisms, such asschool councils and house systems, and through involving young people indecisions about their learning and their school environment. The key tothis would seem to be to educate school leaders and teachers alongsideyoung people in the skills of active participation, so that young people cangenuinely be empowered to have meaningful involvement in the life oftheir schools;• creating a climate for mutual respect between teachers and youngpeople – Teachers need to set an example as good role models throughtheir professional conduct (students value teachers who they see as ‘goodeducators’) and by treating young people with interest and respect.However, such treatment also needs to exist between young people andteachers. Where there is a lack of mutual trust, formal structures (e.g.school councils) that, in principle, give students a voice, can fail. Someschools speak of the importance of shared values amongst all teachers andyoung people;• ensuring that there is equality of opportunity for all young people –Schools need to ensure that systems/strategies are in place that guaranteeequality of opportunity for all students (including the less academicallyable, those who underachieve and the socially excluded). Mechanisms forcreating a sense of belonging to the school community (such as schoolcouncils/houses) will only provide genuine opportunities for activecitizenship if they serve all students, not just the committed or enthusiastic;• dividing the school community up into smaller communities – Largerschools can do much to create a greater sense of belonging for students bydividing the school population into smaller communities through houses orform groups. The case-study data indicates that, whilst this tends to createa greater sense of allegiance to the small community than to the school as awhole, this does not matter terribly, as it also provides a structure withinwhich young people can build confidence, opportunities and skills forparticipation, which benefit the school as a whole;• working on the physical appearance of the school – The case-study dataindicates that young people valued having a clean, modern schoolenvironment and good facilities and technologies. It would seem thatschools which work hard to improve their appearance (in tandem with78

Moving active citizenship forwardtheir ethos) create an environment in which young people feel safe, secureand stimulated.The case-study data also suggests that schools need to be aware of the impacton young people of their sense of belonging to the local community. This canbe both an advantage and disadvantage to the building of a sense of belongingto the school community. The data identifies a number of factors that appear tocreate a sense of belonging to local community among students. The youngpeople themselves valued the concept of community and displayed a strongsense of the need for individual and collective social responsibility within theirneighbourhoods, as well as valuing the sense of security that can come fromliving in a safe and friendly community.Some schools were advantaged where a student population was served by arelatively cohesive local community (e.g. a small, close-knit community), andstudents were relatively content with their sense of community. These studentstended to be those who:• have lots of friends in their neighbourhoods;• have parents who have a wide social network;• feel trusted by older people in their communities.Conversely, other schools served students who come from disparatecommunities, and communities where students felt unsafe or not trusted byolder people. These schools faced greater challenges in creating a sense ofbelonging for young people within the school community and providing aclimate within which opportunities and skills for active citizenship can bedeveloped. However, it could be argued, that there is all the more need forsuch schools to create a sense of belonging within the school community, andto develop the skills of active participation amongst their students, in order tocounteract students’ sense of lack of belonging to the wider local communitybeyond school.b) Develop an ongoing, active focus in the delivery ofcitizenship educationSome young people (particularly those attending high achieving schools, orschools where citizenship education has a particularly high profile) felt thatcitizenship education had proved useful in helping them to form opinions andgain knowledge and understanding (particularly of political structures andprocesses). However, students in other schools noted that citizenshipeducation was not always particularly stimulating or useful because they feltthat: it was teaching them nothing new or different; did little to change theway that they thought about things, or was poorly taught and facilitated.Teachers in some of these schools pointed out that it has also proven difficultto engage low achieving students in citizenship education.79

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportThese findings suggest a need for citizenship education delivery in schools todevelop a more active focus, in order that young people can develop the skills,knowledge and understanding they need to participate in their schools and thewider community to greatest effect. In particular, case-study evidence suggeststhat:• citizenship-related lessons may need ‘bringing to life’, so that youngpeople can engage with the subject content. A key to this would seem to beto negotiate areas of interest with students (topics related to public issuessuch as drugs, AIDS and HIV, racism and the media are popular, forexample);• elements of the programme that relate to rights and responsibilities shouldseek to ensure an equal focus on both aspects. This would enable youngpeople to recognise the range of responsibilities they need to develop, inrelation to themselves, others, their schools and the wider community, inorder to be truly active citizens;• young people should be encouraged (with appropriate support) to becritically active and reflective in lessons so that they are not just learningdetails, but are beginning to engage with the issues covered, and becomingmore active in their approach to learning;• just like any other subject, citizenship-related lessons need to besufficiently differentiated so that citizenship education is accessible notonly to higher achieving students or the most motivated but to the fullrange of student abilities. This is a particular issue in schools where thecitizenship curriculum is addressed mainly through the GCSE short coursein citizenship at Key Stage 4;• schools need to consider the skills and knowledge development needs ofboth teachers and students, in order that citizenship programmes can bewell organised, thought through and delivered in ways that ensure thesuggestions above can become a reality.c) Assist students to participate in decision-making processes inschools, and beyond, on a regular basisSchools need to be mindful of students’ desire to be consulted and involved indecision making. They should ensure that there are appropriate democraticstructures within schools to enable young people to be actively involved in thelife of the school and in their learning.Within the school community, case-study students appeared to have moreopportunities for active learning and participation within the classroom thanfor input into whole-school decision making. Many students stated that theywere keen to have a voice, although others thought that either it was not theirplace to be consulted on matters relating to the school, or that it would bepointless to be given a say, because their views would not be taken seriously.Although most schools offered a wide range of activities in which students80

Moving active citizenship forwardcould get involved, there was generally a large gap between the availability ofopportunity and the take-up of that opportunity by students. This wasparticularly pronounced in relation to student involvement with schoolcouncils, and is an issue of some concern, given that school councils are meantto represent the whole student population, and provide valuable opportunitiesfor students to learn about democratic decision making and participation.Although there were some examples of opportunities for students to have avoice in the school community in the case-study schools (for example, throughopinion surveys), these opportunities were ad hoc. Survey and case-study datasuggests that schools need to address the issue of low student participation inschool decision-making processes by helping young people to:• understand why having a voice is important. There would seem to be aclear role for the citizenship education curriculum in helping students tounderstand what can be achieved through individual and collectiveinvolvement in democratic decision-making structures. For some schools,this may represent something of a culture shift as not all schools think thatit is the students’ place to have a say on matters affecting the school. Thepoint is that students need a clear rationale for why taking part matters;• use their voice effectively. Some staff and students report that studentscan lose control in debating situations and start ‘yelling at each other’, orthat some students can intimidate others. This suggests a range of trainingand development issues for both the staff facilitating these sessions and thestudents taking part in them. Young people need to be helped to get theirpoints across in a constructive, considerate, yet non-confrontational,manner;• understand the mechanisms and processes of influencing policy andchange. It is clear that a number of students (even school councilrepresentatives) do not fully understand the ways in which school councilswork. Schools need to develop a clear statement on the rationale, purpose,and functioning of councils, so that students understand, for example, theprocesses for feeding their views to members and staff and receivingfeedback. Students may also need educating in the reasons for, andappropriate means of taking part in, elections, so that these do not become‘popularity contests’. Again, there is a potential role for the citizenshipcurriculum in this respect;• believe that their voice will be heard. Some school councils are reportedto have very low status, to represent the views of only a ‘keen minority’, orto be discouraged by teachers and school leaders. Some students reportthat, whilst they are given opportunities to express their views in principle,in practice they are either chastised by some teachers for doing so, or thatteachers do not think they are sufficiently mature to have a voice. If schoolcouncils (and similar structures) are to be effective, students need tobelieve that there is a clear mechanism for their views to be taken intoaccount, and that their views will be taken seriously.81

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportA growth in students’ participation in school councils (or similar mechanisms)is only likely to occur where schools take measures to address at least some ofthe above issues.As with the situation within the school community, there were currently moreopportunities for students to take part in volunteering activities in the widercommunity than to have a voice in decision-making processes outside ofschool. This suggests that opportunities for ‘horizontal’ outweigh those for‘vertical’ participation both in and beyond school. 19 This underlines the factthat schools and wider communities have some way to go if opportunities foractive citizenship are to be fully realised.d) Provide sufficient training and development in relation toactive citizenship for teachers and studentsIf the development of active citizenship is to be achieved in schools, it is clearfrom the research that teachers need to have sufficient training in order tobecome skilled in facilitating such learning and teaching. They also need tobe given the appropriate time and resources in which to consider links betweenthe citizenship curriculum, school democratic structures, and issues within thewider community. That training should begin with developing a basicunderstanding of what active citizenship means and how it can be facilitated inthe curriculum and through whole school and community links. At present,many citizenship coordinators and teachers regard active citizenship assomething distinct from the citizenship curriculum, and are struggling with asense of what it means and how it should be approached. A key pointemerging from the data, which might assist the promotion of active citizenshipin schools, is that training should help to develop a view of active citizenshipas an integral feature of citizenship education which can be addressed through:• critical engagement with local, national and international issues within thecurriculum, rather than the learning of facts about such issues;• opportunities for reflection and review of issues covered, such as theopportunity for students to reflect on their experiences of being involved inwork experience or community experience, and on what they have learnedthrough such opportunities;• discussion of the processes of democratic decision making within theschool, the local community, or globally, drawing upon the example of theschool council, how it operates, and how it could be used to best effect.The experience of the case-study schools suggests it would also make sense toensure that the training of teachers is carried out in parallel with the training ofstudents, so that they also have the requisite knowledge, understanding andskills to make the most of the opportunities and experiences of citizenship asan active practice that are offered to them in school. Students need to be19See footnote 15.82

Moving active citizenship forwardencouraged to become critically active and reflective and to developconfidence in the growth and use of student voice, both individually andcollectively, in the classroom, school and beyond.6.3.4 Key challenges and ways forward for representatives ofthe wider communityThe key challenges for those in the wider community include the need to:• recognise that the provision of opportunities and experiences of activecitizenship is not solely the responsibility of schools. Schools can make amajor contribution but they cannot develop citizenship as an activepractice effectively without the support of those in the wider community.Citizenship as an active practice can only work where there is a real andlasting partnership between schools and representatives and organisationsfrom local, national and wider communities. This partnership must bebased on mutual trust and respect. Those in the wider community need toconsider how they can facilitate such partnerships;• take responsibility for their actions and the impact that they have on youngpeople. Students in the case-study schools were influenced by the attitudesand behaviour of those in their families, neighbourhoods and those theysaw in the media. It is important that those beyond school work providegood role models for young people in terms of their attitudes andbehaviours, particularly in relation to rights and responsibilities;• work hard to promote a strong sense of belonging, particularly to the localneighbourhood or community, and actively involve young people in thatprocess. Young people want to feel valued, trusted and safe in thecommunity;• recognise that for many young people the school is their main social andparticipative community and learn from best practice in how schools fostera sense of belonging to the school community. Those in the widercommunity can benefit from working with and in schools and sharing andpromoting good practice;• encourage young people to build on the knowledge, understanding andskills that they develop through active citizenship in schools by providingthem with further opportunities for active involvement and participation incommunities beyond school.6.3.5 Key challenges and ways forward for policy makers atnational and local levelThe key challenges and ways forward for policy makers at national and locallevel concern the need to:• do more to emphasise the importance of providing real and meaningfulopportunities and experiences of active citizenship for young people and to83

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportpromote the benefits for young people, schools and communities of suchopportunities and experiences;• increase awareness and understanding about citizenship as an activepractice and of the key contribution that schools can make in laying thefoundations for such practice. This can also provide incentives for schoolsto prioritise taking forward such practice alongside competing agendas;• publicise and make more explicit the links between the promotion ofactive citizenship in schools, particularly through the citizenshipcurriculum, and the wider participation and civil renewal agendas, notablyEvery Child Matters: Change for Children programme action plan, andemphasise the particular contribution of the citizenship curriculum toparticipation;• recognise the challenges and complexity of the change process that liesbehind active citizenship. This involves taking a more long-term approachto the development of successful delivery and being more supportive andunderstanding of the efforts of individuals and organisations, particularlyschools, to initiate this change process;• work to provide a more coordinated approach to the development ofcitizenship as an active practice, particularly at a local level, that linksschools with key community partners and organisations, and affords more‘joined up’ opportunities and experiences for young people;• ensure that young people have opportunities and experiences of activecitizenship in the community that offer experiences of both ‘horizontal’and ‘vertical’ participation and enable real engagement with decisionmakingprocesses;• support schools to develop their practice in ways that further reduceminimalist approaches and encourage schools categorised as focused andimplicit to become progressing in their practice;• provide requisite training and resources, particularly in schools for schoolleaders, citizenship coordinators and teachers, as well as for young people.This training should focus on improving the understanding of citizenshipas an active practice, and increase the confidence of its delivery throughmore active learning and teaching approaches both in the curriculum andacross the school. It should: consider the promotion of the four-stepapproach to active citizenship outlined in this chapter and have the sharingof emerging good practice at its core; cover the span of continuousprofessional development from initial teacher training through to thetraining of school leaders; and explore the potential for joint traininginitiatives involving school and link community partners;• work in multi-agency partnerships, involving schools, to tackle thechallenge of encouraging increased engagement and participation fromthose students who are underachieving, disaffected or socially excluded.84

Moving active citizenship forward6.3.6 Key challenges and ways forward for young peopleThough, as the evidence from the survey and school case-study visitshighlights, opportunities and experiences of active citizenship are oftenprovided for young people by others, there are a number of key challenges andways forward for young people. They include the need to:• take up more of the opportunities and experiences of active citizenship thatare provided, particularly in schools. This includes those concerningtraining and development. Encourage other young people to take up theopportunities by pointing out their responsibilities and the benefits ofparticipation in ways that they will understand. Work individually andcollaboratively to build a strong sense of belonging, particularly to theschool community;• build the confidence to make the most of student voice and be considerateand constructive in how it is used, both in collaboration with other youngpeople and in partnership with adults. Recognise that inappropriate use ofvoice, such as yelling at and intimidating others, reduces its effectivenessand takes away from the belief that students can be trusted to use voiceeffectively;• give greater consideration not only to rights of participation andengagement but also to associated responsibilities to participate andengage in the different communities to which they belong;• have the confidence to raise concerns, where appropriate, about the typeand level of active citizenship opportunities and experiences provided indifferent contexts, so as to ensure engagement with issues that matter toyoung people and opportunities to influence the decision-making process.6.4 Moving forward – a final commentIt is clear from the evidence in this report that there is considerable potential todevelop citizenship as an active practice, especially in schools. It is alsoevident that the introduction of citizenship education in schools can make aparticular contribution in deepening and enriching such active practice, to thebenefit of wider participation and civil renewal agendas. However, in terms ofcurrent approaches to citizenship education, this potential is only beingpartially realised in practice at present, and only in some case-study schoolsand not all. The report highlights a number of challenges that need toaddressed in order for more schools to recognise the potential to developcitizenship as an active practice.The current situation is understandable given that citizenship education wasnot introduced as a statutory curriculum subject until 2002, and that, therefore,citizenship practice in schools is still bedding in. The vision of the policymakers involved with the Citizenship Advisory Group was that it would take ageneration of young people to have experienced statutory citizenship provision85

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportbefore any judgement could be made about the merits of introducingcitizenship into schools in 2002 (Crick, 2000). The evolution of citizenship inschools is evidenced in this report in the greater focus of survey and casestudyschools on developing citizenship as a recognisable curriculum subject.This development carries with it considerable potential but also certaindangers in terms of young people’s opportunities for active citizenship inschool and beyond. On the one hand, it offers the potential to lay a strongcurriculum base for citizenship education and for students to develop thefundamental knowledge, skills and understanding that underpin citizenship asan active practice in and beyond school. On the other hand, there is a dangerthat the curriculum base for citizenship that is developed will limit its impactas envisaged by Professor (Sir) Bernard Crick, namely that:Citizenship is more than a statutory subject. If taught well andtailored to local needs, its skills and values will enhance democraticlife for us all, both rights and responsibilities, beginning in school, andradiating out. (ibid, p.12)The curriculum base could be that of ‘solely’ rather than ‘more than’ astatutory subject where the teaching is patchy, not tailored to local needs andinterests of local communities and with insufficient links between thecurriculum and school culture and wider communities so that there is noradiating out.It is unclear from the evidence in this report whether the present increasedfocus on citizenship as a curriculum subject in the survey and case-studyschools is merely a stage in the process of citizenship bedding down in schoolsthat will be followed by increased links between the citizenship curriculumand whole school and wider community approaches in the coming years, orwhether it is a more permanent and limiting development. It raises the overallquestion as to how far, and in what direction, the citizenship curriculum inschools will continue to develop in the coming years, and the extent to whichsuch development will succeed in fostering increased opportunities andexperiences of active citizenship for students. It is clear that some case-studyschools are in a much better position to take active citizenship forward,through the citizenship curriculum, than others. However, it is not clear whatwill happen in the coming years.How citizenship education develops in the survey and case-study schools inthe coming years will have a bearing on how well citizenship education inschools is able to make a contribution to wider policy initiatives such as theEvery Child Matters: Change for Children programme and civil renewalaction plan. In order to fulfil the potential to make a distinctive contribution,as identified in the introduction to this report, citizenship education will haveto first succeed in providing young people with real and meaningfulopportunities and experiences of participation in the classroom and school, as86

Moving active citizenship forwardwell as opportunities to reflect on that participation. Only if this occurs willcitizenship education in schools be in a position to ‘begin in school andradiate out’ to wider policy initiatives in the way that was envisaged by policymakers when statutory citizenship was introduced in 2002.There are indications, in the current practice of case-study schools, that theability of schools to provide such opportunities and experiences may dependon the level of support and encouragement they are given to help them to:better understand what active citizenship means in practice; recognise thecontribution of citizenship education to such practice; and to develop a clearvision of how to move forward. There are encouraging signs, in some of thecase-study schools of the emergence of such a vision, across the school, and ofits impact on students’ active citizenship opportunities and experiences. Thefollowing two quotations capture the spirit of this vision in schools. As acitizenship coordinator in one school noted:I would hope my students to be bloody-minded, and questioning afterthey have done citizenship education.Meanwhile, a headteacher in another school explained how citizenshipeducation provided the glue that linked the curriculum, school ethos andcommunity and wider community beyond the school. As he noted:We actually always have set ourselves a prime aim of formingresponsible citizens of the future…citizenship education…by whatevername we call it, has always had to be there. Our school is multi-faith,multi-racial, multi-ethnic. It does, therefore, very much need to createa homogeneous community and homogeneous society in our school butalso to enable our learners to go out and be members of that widercommunity and fulfil their roles there.With much still to play for in terms of the promotion and development ofactive citizenship for young people, the nature and extent of the contributionof statutory citizenship education to that development, and the impact of thepolicy backdrop of the Every Child Matters: Change for Children programmeand Together We Can initiative, it will be interesting to follow up on the issuesraised in this report through the Study’s components in the coming years.It will be particularly interesting to revisit the case-study schools to see whathas transpired and to gauge how far the potential for active citizenship hasbeen realised in practice.87

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report88

Appendix 1: Methodology and sample informationAppendix 1.Methodology and sampleinformationSurvey designThe Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study comprises two linked biennialsurveys, a cross-sectional survey and a longitudinal survey, which tracks acohort of students from Year 7 until they are aged 18. (See Appendix 3 formore details.) This report discusses findings from the second round of thelongitudinal survey which was carried out in spring 2005. Also, whereappropriate, comparisons are made with data from the first longitudinal surveyof Year 7 students, which took place in autumn 2002.Second Longitudinal Survey administrationA total of 91 schools who had taken part in the first round of the longitudinalsurvey in 2002 when students surveyed were in Year 7 agreed to participate insecond round of the survey in 2005 when the students were in Year 9. InJanuary 2005 schools were sent questionnaires for:• the whole of their Year 9 year group;• five Key Stage 3 citizenship teachers;• one school leader.Schools were asked to complete the questionnaires within two weeks ofreceiving them. Schools who had not returned questionnaires after this datewere sent reminder letters and faxes, and were contacted by telephone to askthem to complete and return the questionnaires. In addition, those schools whohad not returned school leader questionnaires were sent additional copies ofthe questionnaire with letter reminders. In July 2005, all schools that hadcompleted student questionnaires were sent feedback consisting of theirstudents’ aggregated responses compared to the aggregated responses ofstudents in all other schools.Response ratesQuestionnaires were completed by:• School leaders: 81;• Teachers: 301;• Year 9 students 13,643.89

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportThe numbers of schools returning each type of questionnaire were as shown:Returned any type ofquestionnaire (number and percent of schools)Returned Year 9 questionnaires(number and per cent of pupils)Returned teacher questionnaires(number and per cent of teachers)Returned school leaderquestionnaire(number and per cent of schools)Returned all three types ofquestionnaire (number and percent of schools)Numberreturningquestionnaires% of those agreeing toparticipate in survey85 9313, 643 73301 6681 8980 88Characteristics of studentsThe characteristics of students were as follows:GenderStudents%Books in the homeStudents%Ethnic backgroundStudents%Male 48 None 2 Asian/British Asian 7Female 48 Very few (1-10) 12 Black/Black British 2Nonresponse4 One shelf (11-50) 22 Chinese 11 bookcase (51-100) 22 Mixed ethnic origin 22 bookcases (101-200) 17 White British 783+ bookcases (201+) 20 White European 2Non-response 5 Other ethnic group 1Prefer not to say 2Non-response 4N = 13,643 students. Due to rounding percentages may not add to 100Source: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Survey, Longitudinal Survey 200590

Appendix 1: Methodology and sample informationSampleTable A1 compares the characteristics of the 85 schools who responded to thesurvey with the national profile of maintained schools, and shows that thesample is closely representative of the national school population.The sample covers a spread of geographical regions, types of school and levelsof achievement at GCSE. There are only minor variations from the nationalpattern within the sample with:• slightly more schools in the south and slightly fewer in the north;• slightly fewer comprehensive schools up to the age of 18, and slightlymore ‘other’ schools (not grammar or comprehensive);• slightly more schools with one to three per cent of students with SpecialEducational Needs (SEN);• slightly more schools in the second lowest band of the percentage ofstudents eligible for free school meals (FSM);• slightly fewer student in the lowest band for achievement at GCSE.NB EAL stands for ‘English as an Additional Language’.91

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportTable A1. CEE Longitudinal Survey 2005Representation of the Sample (schools)SchoolsSchools returning anyinformationSchools in populationNumber % Number %North 21 25 910 29Region Midlands 27 32 1,018 33South 37 44 1,173 38Total 85 100 3,101 100Secondaryschool typeComprehensive to 16 36 42 1,238 40Comprehensive to 18 36 42 1,531 49Grammar 2 2 161 5Other Secondary schools 11 13 171 6Total 85 100 3,101 100% of EALpupils (2003)None 16 19 667 221 - 5% 43 51 1,511 496 - 49% 22 26 768 2550% + 4 5 153 5No Information Available 2 0Total 85 100 3,101 100% of SENpupils (2002)None 96 31 - 3% 50 59 1,512 494 - 29% 13 15 563 18No Information Available 22 26 930 30Total 85 100 3,101 100% eligible FSM2003 (5 pt scale)Lowest 20% 3 4 202 72nd lowest 20% 26 31 741 24Middle 20% 21 25 829 272nd highest 20% 22 26 771 25Highest 20% 13 15 555 18No Information Available 3 0Total 85 100 3,101 100AchievementBand (TotalGCSE pointscore2002)Lowest band 14 16 661 212nd lowest band 22 26 664 21Middle band 18 21 634 202nd highest band 18 21 596 19Highest band 11 13 494 16No Information Available 2 2 52 2Total 85 100 3,101 100Since percentages are rounded to the nearest integer, they may not always sum to 100. Schools inpopulation column refers only to those schools of matching types to those in sample (e.g. not primaryschools).Source: Citizenship Education Longitudinal Survey, Longitudinal Survey 200592

Appendix 1: Methodology and sample informationCase-study schoolsNine case-study schools were selected from the first cross-sectional sampleschools in 2003. In-depth case-studies first took place in these schools duringthe spring and summer terms of 2003. These schools were visited again in thespring and summer terms of 2005, and the data collected from these secondvisits is referred to in this report. An additional school with SpecialistHumanities status with citizenship as one of its lead subjects was added to thesample and was visited for the first time in summer 2005.The case-study schools were not selected to be representative of schoolsnationally, but rather illustrative of the range of different approaches to andexperiences of citizenship education. The characteristics of the ten case-studyschools are described below.• Two schools were in the north, three in the midlands and five in the southof the country.• Nine were comprehensive schools and one was selective.• Seven schools had students from 11 to 18 years old and three from 13 to18. 20• Three schools were large with over 1,500 students, six schools hadbetween 1,000 and 1,500 students and one school had fewer than 1, 000students.• Nine schools were mixed and one was a single sex (girls) school.• Two schools were faith schools.• Only one school did not have Specialist Status. Of the nine schools withSpecialist Status, there were two Language colleges, two TechnologyColleges, two Sports Colleges, one Engineering College, one Mathematicsand Computing College and one Humanities College (with citizenship asone of its lead subjects).• Nine schools had between one and three per cent of students eligible forfree school meals, however, one school had 21 per cent.• Eight schools had between zero and three per cent of students with Englishas an Additional Language, though one school had 12 per cent and another33 per cent.• Three schools, including the selective school, had achievement in terms of5+ A* to C grades at GCSE very much higher than the national average,four were at or slightly above average and three were considerably belowthis average.The case-study schools had a range of approaches to citizenship education andmany used more than one delivery method at Key Stages 3 and 4.20In the 13 to 18 schools, citizenship coordinators from feeder schools were also interviewed.93

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportDelivery at Key Stage 3:• Six schools were delivering citizenship education through discrete lessons,sometimes as part of a carousel with other subjects such as Personal,Social and Health Education (PSHE) and careers, education and guidance.• Four schools were delivering citizenship through other subjects. Someschools used all other subjects to deliver citizenship education, whilstothers only used a few specific lessons such as history, geography andreligious education.• Two schools were delivering citizenship as part of PSHE.• Two schools were delivering citizenship through collapsed timetable daysand events.Delivery at Key Stage 4:• Seven schools used discrete lessons.• Two schools delivered citizenship education through other subjects.• Two schools delivered citizenship through PSHE.• One school was using collapsed timetable days and events.In terms of assessment, the schools also had a range of approaches.Assessment at Key Stage 3:• In three schools teachers assessed students’ achievement in citizenship.In some schools this was an assessment of students’ progress over thecourse of a term or year and in other schools this was an assessment of aparticular piece of work such as a presentation.• Two schools used self-assessment at the end of a particular piece of workor a module.• One school used Award Scheme Development and Accreditation Network(ASDAN) awards.• Two schools did not assess students specifically for citizenship at KeyStage 3.Assessment at Key Stage 4:• Five schools used the GCSE Citizenship Studies short course to assessstudents.• Two schools used teacher assessment.• One school used self-assessment.• One school used ASDAN Awards.• Two schools did not assess students for citizenship at Key Stage 4.94

Appendix 2: ReferencesAppendix 2.ReferencesAdvisory Group on Education and Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy inSchools (1998). Education for Citizenship and the Teaching of Democracy in Schools(Crick Report). London: QCA.Bell, D. (2005a). ‘Education for democratic citizenship.’ Speech for the RoscoeLecture Series, Liverpool, 2 November. [online]. Available:http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/index.cfm?fuseaction=pubs.displayfile&id=4083&type=pdf [13 January, 2006].Bell, D. (2005b). ‘Citizenship through participation and responsible action.’ Speechfor the Barclays New Futures Conference, 15 November [online]. Available:http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/index.cfm?fuseaction=pubs.displayfile&id=4088&type=pdf [13 January, 2006].Blunkett D (2003a). Civil Renewal: A New Agenda. London: CSV/Home Office.Blunkett D (2003b). Active Citizens, Strong Communities: Progressing Civil Renewal.London: Home OfficeBuonfino, A. and Mulgan, G. (2006). Porcupines in Winter: The Pleasures and Painsof Living Together in Modern Britain. London: Young Foundation.Cleaver, E., Ireland, E., Kerr, D. and Lopes, J. (2005). Citizenship EducationLongitudinal Study: Second Cross-Sectional Survey 2004. Listening to Young People:Citizenship Education in England (DfES Research Report 626). London: DfES.Coleman, S. with Rowe, C. (2005). Remixing Citizenship: Democracy and YoungPeople’s Use of the Internet. London: Carnegie Young People’s Initiative: London.Craig, R., Kerr, D., Wade, P. and Taylor, G. (2004). Taking Post-16 CitizenshipForward: Learning from the Post-16 Citizenship Development Projects (DfESResearch Report 604). London: DfES.Crick, B. (2000). Essays on Citizenship. London: Continuum.Department for Education and Skills (2004). Working Together: Giving Children andYoung People a Say. London: DfES.Further Education Funding Council (2000). Citizenship for 16-19 Year Olds inEducation and Training. Report of the Advisory Group to the Secretary of State forEducation and Employment. Coventry: FEFC.Great Britain. Parliament. House of Commons (2005). Youth Matters (Cm. 6629).London: The Stationery Office.95

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportHM Government (2004). Every Child Matters: Change for Children [online].Available:http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/_files/F9E3F941DC8D4580539EE4C743E9371D.pdf [13 January, 2006].HM Government (2005). Togetherwecan: People and Government, Working Togetherto Make Life Better. London: The Civil Renewal Unit..Jochum, V., Pratten, B. and Wilding, K. (2005). Civil Renewal and ActiveCitizenship: a Guide to the Debate [online]. Available: http://www.ncvovol.org.uk/asp/uploads/uploadedfiles/1/637/civilrenewalactivecitizenship.pdf[26 July,2005].Kerr, D. (2005). ‘Citizenship education in England – listening to young people: newinsights from the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study’, International Journal ofCitizenship and Teacher Education, 1, 1, 74–93.Kerr, D., Cleaver, E., Ireland, E. and Blenkinsop, S. (2003). CitizenshipEducation Longitudinal Study: First Cross-sectional Survey 2001-2002 (DfESResearch Report 416). London: DfES.Kerr, D. and Cleaver, E. (2004). Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: LiteratureReview. Citizenship Education One Year On: What Does it Mean?: EmergingDefinitions and Approaches in the First Year of National Curriculum Citizenship inEngland (DfES Research Report 532). London: DfES.Kerr, D., Ireland, E., Lopes, J. and Craig, R. with Cleaver, E. (2004). MakingCitizenship Real. Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Second Annual Report.First Longitudinal Survey (DfES Research Report 531). London: DfES.Lopes, J. and Kerr, D. (2005). ‘Moving citizenship education forward: keyconsiderations for schools and colleges’, Topic, 34, 50–56.Office for Standards in Education (2003). National Curriculum Citizenship: Planningand Implementation 2002/03. Available: www.ofsted.gov.uk.Office for Standards in Education (2005a). An Evaluation of the Post-16 CitizenshipPilot 2004-2005. A Report from Ofsted and the Adult Learning Inspectorate (HMI2440). London: OFSTED.Office for Standards in Education (2005b). Citizenship in Secondary Schools:Evidence from Ofsted Inspections (2003/4) (HMI 2335). London: OFSTED.Office for Standards in Education (2005c). Citizenship in Secondary Schools: TheAnnual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Schools 2004/05 [online].Available: http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/annual report0405/4.2.3.html [13January, 2006].Office for standards in Education (2005). Every Child Matters: Framework for theInspection of Children’s Services (HMI 2433). London OFSTED.96

Appendix 2: ReferencesOffice for Standards in Education (2005d). Every Child Matters: Framework for theInspection of Schools in England from September 2005 (HMI 2435). London:OFSTED.Office for Standards in Education (2005e). Every Child Matters: Framework for theInspection of Children’s Services (HMI 2433). [online].Available:http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/publications/index.cfm?fuseaction=pubs.displayfile&id=3765&type=docOffice for Standards in Education (2005f). Joint area review, Slough Children’sServices Authority Area. Review of Services for Children and Young People.[online].Available:http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/reports/index.cfm?fuseaction=viewjar&leaid=871&reporttype=fr&year=2005 [16 January 2006].Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (1998). Education for Citizenship and theTeaching of Democracy in Schools: Final Report of the Advisory Group onCitizenship, 22 September 1998. London: QCA.Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (1999). Citizenship: the NationalCurriculum for England Key Stages 3-4. London: DfEE and QCA.Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2003). Citizenship 2002/3 Annual Reporton Curriculum and Assessment. London: QCA.Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2004). Citizenship 2003/4 Annual Reporton Curriculum and Assessment. London: QCA.Qualifications and Curriculum Authority (2005). Citizenship 2004/5 Annual Reporton Curriculum and Assessment. London: QCA.Whiteley, P. (2005). Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Second LiteratureReview. Citizenship Education: the Political Science Perspective (DfES ResearchReport 631). London: DfES.97

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual report98

Appendix 3: The citizenship education longitudinal studyAppendix 3.The Citizenship EducationLongitudinal StudyBackgroundThe Department for Education and Skills (DfES) has commissioned NFER toundertake a longitudinal study extending over a total of eight years, in order totrack a cohort of young people who first entered secondary school in 2002,and are therefore the first students to have a continuous entitlement tocitizenship education.Following the report of the Citizenship Advisory Group (QCA. 1998),citizenship became a new statutory National Curriculum subject at Key Stages3 and 4 in September 2002, for all 11 to 16 year olds in schools in England.The Advisory Group’s definition of ‘effective education for citizenship’ wascentred on three separate but interrelated strands: social and moralresponsibility, community involvement and political literacy.The accompanying Citizenship Order (QCA, 1999) set out the anticipatedlearning outcomes in relation to three elements: knowledge andunderstanding and skills of enquiry and communication and participationand responsible action. However, methods of delivery are not prescribed, andalthough schools are advised to devote at least five per cent of teaching time tocitizenship, they are free to choose how to achieve this goal.Purpose and aimsThe overarching aim of the longitudinal study is to assess the short-term andlong-term effects of citizenship education on students aged 11-16.In addition, the two subsidiary aims are to:♦♦Explore how different processes – in terms of school, teacher and pupileffects – can impact upon differential outcomes.Set out, based on evidence collected from the Study and other sources,what changes could be made to the delivery of citizenship education inorder to improve its potential for effectiveness.Methodology and designThe overall survey design involves linked surveys of school senior managers,teachers and students. There are two series of surveys:• A longitudinal survey, based on a complete cohort from a sample of 75schools. Young people were surveyed in November 2002 following entryto Year 7 and again when they were in Year 9. They will be contacted99

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportagain in Year 11 and at age 18 (the final questionnaire will be sent to homeaddresses). Results from the Year 9 survey are discussed in this report.• A biennial cross-sectional survey, with questionnaires completed byapproximately 2,500 students in each of Years 8, 10 and 12. Each time thesurvey is run, a new sample of 300 schools and colleges is drawn, and onetutor group (about 25 students) from each will take part in the survey.The following schematic diagram illustrates the timing of both surveys131211A B C DYear Groups Surveyed109Longitudinal SurveyCross-sectional Survey - Year 8Cross-sectional Survey - Year 10Cross-sectional Survey - Year 12872001/2 2002/3 2003/4 2004/5 2005/6 2006/7 2007/8 2008/9Academic YearIn all schools participating in the surveys, one senior manager and fiveteachers are also asked to complete questionnaires.In addition to the surveys, the project incorporates a literature review and 20longitudinal case studies. The case-study schools are selected, ten from theschools participating in the first cross-sectional survey, and the other ten fromthe schools involved in the longitudinal survey. School visits include in-depthinterviews with key personnel, lesson observation and student discussiongroups. Results from the second round of case-study visits to the ten schoolswho participated in the cross-sectional survey are described in this report.Research teamThe research team is made up of staff at the NFER:David Kerr, Project DirectorJulie Nelson, Project Leader (maternity cover for Elizabeth Cleaver)Elizabeth Cleaver, Project Leader (on maternity leave)Eleanor Ireland, Senior Research OfficerJoana Lopes, Research OfficerSusan Stoddart, Project SecretaryThomas Benton, Project Statistician.100

Appendix 3: The citizenship education longitudinal studyIn addition, Professor Pat Seyd (University of Sheffield) and Professor PaulWhiteley (University of Essex) are consultants to the study and work inpartnership with NFER.ReportsSo far, the Study has published four annual reports (including this one).The first report Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: First CrosssectionalSurvey (Kerr et al, 2003) focuses on the findings from the firstsurvey undertaken as part of the study, carried out in the year beforecitizenship education became compulsory. It provides a baseline of evidenceof existing knowledge about and provision of, citizenship education inschools, prior to statutory implementation. In addition, it charts thecitizenship-related attitudes and knowledge of students at this time.The second annual report Making Citizenship Education Real (Kerr et al,2004) examines findings from the first longitudinal survey, and first round ofcase-study visits. It establishes a baseline of the attitudes of students, teachersand school leaders to citizenship education in the first year following theintroduction of statutory citizenship education. It also outlines the emergingapproaches to citizenship education in schools and begins to identify andexplore the factors which influence the decision-making processes in schoolsconcerning citizenship education.The third annual report Listening to Young People: Citizenship Educationin England (Cleaver et al, 2005) sets out the findings of the second crosssectionalsurvey. It focuses specifically on students’ experiences,understandings and views of citizenship education and wider citizenshipissues.In addition, the Study has published two literature reviews:The first, Citizenship Education One Year on: What Does it Mean? (Kerrand Cleaver, 2004) focuses on ‘definitions, models, approaches and challengesto citizenship education in policy and practice’ in the first year of nationalcurriculum citizenship in England.The second literature review, Citizenship Education: the Political SciencePerspective (Whiteley, 2005) draws on research in political science whichexamines the relationship between education and citizenship engagement. Aswell as discussing a series of alternative models, which can be used to explainwhy people engage in voluntary activities in politics, it uses data from thelongitudinal survey to test some of these models.Two journal articles discussing the results from the Study have also beenrecently published:Citizenship education in England – Listening to Young People: newinsights from the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study, (Kerr, 2005)101

Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study: Draft fourth annual reportMoving citizenship education forward: key considerations for schools andcolleges, (Lopes and Kerr, 2005).All outputs from the Citizenship Education Longitudinal Study and moreinformation about the Study can be found at the following link:www.nfer.ac.uk/research-areas/citizenship/102

Copies of this publication can be obtained from:DfES PublicationsP.O. Box 5050Sherwood ParkAnnesleyNottinghamNG15 0DJTel: 0845 60 222 60Fax: 0845 60 333 60Minicom: 0845 60 555 60Online: www.dfespublications.gov.uk© National Foundation for Educational Research 2006Produced by the Department for Education and SkillsISBN 1 84478 714 1Ref No: RR732www.dfes.go.uk/research